Name 5 Upgrades or Replacements

[Deus Irae]

First off, the poster you replied to was referring, specifically, to LTs. You mentioned LTs, RT, and some OGs. How does that support your idea that the poster was wrong? If anything, your list shows that getting a quality LT in the first round is a very RARE occurence.

Read the entirety of his initial response. He was referring to tackles in general, as well as left tackles.

 

[Rob0729]

Read the entirety of his initial response. He was referring to tackles in general, as well as left tackles.

But I did say specifically LTs. Who drafts a RT in the top 10 anyway unless you have a lefty QB?

 

[Deus Irae]

If you look at the following page:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=kluck/offensiveline/070425

You will see that most of those tackles were drafted prior to 1998 including Willie Roaf, Richmond Webb, Tony Boselli, Willie Anderson, Lincoln Kennedy, and Jonathan Ogden. The 90s was a great decade for tackles. This decade isn't.

You need to look at his supporting material more and you will see that the 90s skew this information a ton. Some of the best tackles of all time were drafted in that decade. There aren't many or any so far in this decade.

The data shows that tackles that are thought to be worth a top 10 pick tend to end up having been worth drafting. This season, unlike a lot of recent seasons, there may be more than one of those players, even if a couple of them will need developing to achieve that level. Furthermore, New England doesn't typically get a chance to draft this high. These are reasons which strengthen the argument behind drafting a LT, not reasons that weaken it. Even using the 1998 cutoff year as you do, this shows itself to be pretty apparent:

Chris Samuels
Mike Williams
Bryant McKinnie
Levi Jones
Jordan Gross
Robert Gallery
D'Brickashaw Ferguson
Joe Thomas
Levi Brown

That's the entire list of top 10 tackles from the 1998 draft through the 2007 draft. Williams was a bust and Gallery has been moved to guard. The rest of them have either not been in the league long enough to be labeled or have proven not to be busts. So, 9 picks, one certified bust, and at least 3 excellent players (Samuels, McKinnie, Thomas). If the top 10 tackle is available and worth a top 10 pick in Belioli's eyes, that top 10 tackle should be the pick.

 

[Deus Irae]

But I did say specifically LTs. Who drafts a RT in the top 10 anyway unless you have a lefty QB?

I pulled your quote and posted it. Let's not try getting all revisionist now. You mentioned tackles, not just left tackles (that "left tackle" argument came later in your post).

 

[mgteich]

I think that you will find that the jets are not happy with value they received in Brick. But I do agree that a LT drafted at 7 is likely to be a good value. I would also put DE/OLB's in that category. So we're back to Long, Long, Gholston and Clady.

My concern at OL is that Neal has been injured a lot, not unexpected for a non-football player, and the O'Callaghan has had concussion problems in college and in the pros.

The data shows that tackles that are thought to be worth a top 10 pick tend to end up having been worth drafting. This season, unlike a lot of recent seasons, there may be more than one of those players, even if a couple of them will need developing to achieve that level. Furthermore, New England doesn't typically get a chance to draft this high. These are reasons which strengthen the argument behind drafting a LT, not reasons that weaken it. Even using the 1998 cutoff year as you do, this shows itself to be pretty apparent:

Chris Samuels
Mike Williams
Bryant McKinnie
Levi Jones
Jordan Gross
Robert Gallery
D'Brickashaw Ferguson
Joe Thomas
Levi Brown

That's the entire list of top 10 tackles from the 1998 draft through the 2007 draft. Williams was a bust and Gallery has been moved to guard. The rest of them have either not been in the league long enough to be labeled or have proven not to be busts. So, 9 picks, one certified bust, and at least 3 excellent players (Samuels, McKinnie, Thomas). If the top 10 tackle is available and worth a top 10 pick in Belioli's eyes, that top 10 tackle should be the pick.

 

[KevinFaulk-33]

1) Take Nnamdi Asomugha for Samuel's replace if it is cheap (i don't believe).
2) Take Pace for some depth at OLB. (I think that we don't draft elite OLB)
3) Draft a tall CB in the 2nd or 3th round to replace Gay, let him go.
4) Trade down and take a DB in the first round, let him develop behind Hobbs.
5) Draft a o-line man in the 2nd round (especially if he is a right front man).

 

[Rob0729]

Gotta disagree with you there. Jammal Brown and Joe Thomas have looked like franchise LTs.

I think the jury is out for both Brown and Thomas. Brown looked to take a step back this year after having a great rookie season. Both could be franchise LTs, but too soon to tell

Pats believe they already have their replacement for Harrison at SS in Sanders. To say that you would already replace Meriweather because he didn't show enough his rookie season speaks volumes about your ability to understand how the Pats bring people along. The Pats had 3 starting quality safeties in front of Meriweather. They drafted Meriweather because they knew they'd probably be losing one or both of either Harrison (retirement) or Wilson (free agency).

I am not sure where Meriweather will fit in on our defense. Neither am I sure that they are sold on Sanders as the long term replacement for Harrison. If a stud safety is available, I don't know if the Pats would pass on him. They can always move Meriweather to CB.

I will give you that safety won't be their biggest priority, but they do have the flexibility to switch that to the priority if Belichick and Pioli think they are staring at the next Rodney when their pick comes up.

I don't believe you can compare the Pats 3-4 to the Jets 3-4. But that's just me. Yes, the basics are there, but the Pats do a lot more changing up than the Jets did last year.

I will give you that the Pats run a more complicated scheme, but it is still a complicated defense.

The Pats used a lot of 3-4 WR sets because they were without quality depth at TE. Also, I'd put one that at least one of Moss, Stallworth and Gaffney are back.

I am guessing Moss and Gaffney will be back, but nothing is definite for any of them. WR could end up being a priority come draft time or we may have too many WRs.

Willis is not starting in a 3-4 2 Gap defense. He's playing in a 3-4 1 gap defense.

I know Willis plays in a different defense. Not really comparing him.

I agree that adding an "elephant" type LB in the mold of McGinest would be nice. However, the Pats have yet to draft a LB above the 3rd round (I am including that they were going to draft Stewart Bradley). And that includes ILB and OLB.

I do agree that the odds of the Pats selecting a LB in the first round are slim based on past history, but they have only had a draft pick this high only once in the Belichick era. He could break from tradition.

I think that people really over-state the salary cap issue with Colvin. While Colvin's injury was "season ending," almost all injuries at that point in the season are season ending unless its of the mild sprain/strain category. Look at Seau last year when he broke his arm. Breaks are usually a 6-8 week recovery. Yet the Pats IRed him. Lets not act like Colvin's injury is career threatening.

We don't know what Colvin's injury really is. I am not as worried about it being career threatening rather than performance limiting for next season. If it was something like an ACL tear, it could be that.

I think that the Pats need to bring in some younger talent at LB and be willing to let players like Bruschi, Vrabel and Seau teach them. And having higher end talent there wouldn't be a bad thing.

I agree.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think that you will find that the jets are not happy with value they received in Brick. But I do agree that a LT drafted at 7 is likely to be a good value. I would also put DE/OLB's in that category. So we're back to Long, Long, Gholston and Clady.

My concern at OL is that Neal has been injured a lot, not unexpected for a non-football player, and the O'Callaghan has had concussion problems in college and in the pros.

I'm not a Brick fan, myself. Something seems to be missing with that guy. But, in context of the discussion, I tried to be as fair as possible in both directions and I just think it's too soon to call Brick a bust. He did improve somewhat from season one to season two, after all.

I also look at the right guard position as a potential problem due to Neal's frequent injuries. I just think tackle before guard is the way to look at an offensive line when you're looking at a top 10 pick.

 

[Rob0729]

I pulled your quote and posted it. Let's not try getting all revisionist now. You mentioned tackles, not just left tackles (that "left tackle" argument came later in your post).

I specifically asked you to name me three above average to great Left Tackles over the last decade in my first post response to you. I did say the position OVER THE LAST DECADE has been a risky position with probably more busts and disapointments in the top 10, but I again asked you to name LEFT TACKLES and you proceeded to name every tackle taken. Not revising anything. Here is my original post:

No way do I want the Patriots using a first round pick on a LT. Other than QB, I don't think there has been a position with more first round and even top 10 pick busts than the tackle position. Can you even name five above average to great LTs taken in the first round from the draft after Jones and Pace were taken until today. I don't know if you can and that was a decade ago now.

I think the only ones are Chris Samuels and Joe Thomas. That's in a decade of first round picks.

 

[DaBruinz]

Read the entirety of his initial response. He was referring to tackles in general, as well as left tackles.

I read the post you responded to. That is what matters. And, in that post, he was talking, specifically, about LTs. Yes, he did say "tackle position", but the reality is that his first sentence clearly states LT and then he supports that by mentioning Jones and Pace.

and here was his response to your response:

Ummm... How many of these guys are playing LEFT TACKLE? Many of these guys are playing other positions. Guys like John Tait, Jordan Gross, Shawn Andrews, Tra Thomas have made their names at other positions other than LT.

If you are looking for a guy to play LT in the first round, you are most likely going to be out of luck. You specifically said LT and first round LTs are usually busts or disapointments. The odds say you will not find Light's immediate or future replacement in the first round.

At least you proved my point, that over the last decade the first round hasn't produced many above average to great LTs. We might get a great RT or guard, but you don't want a great RT or guard with the seventh pick in the draft.

 

[DaBruinz]

The data shows that tackles that are thought to be worth a top 10 pick tend to end up having been worth drafting. This season, unlike a lot of recent seasons, there may be more than one of those players, even if a couple of them will need developing to achieve that level. Furthermore, New England doesn't typically get a chance to draft this high. These are reasons which strengthen the argument behind drafting a LT, not reasons that weaken it. Even using the 1998 cutoff year as you do, this shows itself to be pretty apparent:

Chris Samuels
Mike Williams - He's a bust.
Bryant McKinnie
Levi Jones
Jordan Gross - He's been lousy at LT, the position he was drafted for.
Robert Gallery - He's been a bust as well.
D'Brickashaw Ferguson - Things don't look great for D'Brick.
Joe Thomas - Too early to tell, but looks promising.
Levi Brown - Too early to tell, but looks promising.

That's the entire list of top 10 tackles from the 1998 draft through the 2007 draft. Williams was a bust and Gallery has been moved to guard. The rest of them have either not been in the league long enough to be labeled or have proven not to be busts. So, 9 picks, one certified bust, and at least 3 excellent players (Samuels, McKinnie, Thomas). If the top 10 tackle is available and worth a top 10 pick in Belioli's eyes, that top 10 tackle should be the pick.

Gallery being moved to guard puts him in the category of bust because he was drafted to be a LT. The same can be said about Gross, who was drafted to be a LT and has played at RT because he can't handle LT in the NFL.

I wouldn't say that 3 confirmed excellent players out of 7 is good for top 10 picks.

That being said, I don't believe that there is a surefire TOP 10 LT in this draft. I know that J. Long is touted as such, but I've read on several places where many though that RT would be Long's better position.

 

[Deus Irae]

I specifically asked you to name me three above average to great Left Tackles over the last decade in my first post response to you. I did say the position OVER THE LAST DECADE has been a risky position with probably more busts and disapointments in the top 10, but I again asked you to name LEFT TACKLES and you proceeded to name every tackle taken. Not revising anything. Here is my original post:

And my response, as should have been obvious by the fact that I posted every tackle drafted in the first round during the time frame, was to this erroneous statement:

Other than QB, I don't think there has been a position with more first round and even top 10 pick busts than the tackle position.

 

[DaBruinz]

And my response, as should have been obvious by the fact that I posted every tackle drafted in the first round during the time frame, was to this erroneous statement:

And that statement was framed on EITHER SIDE by him talking about the LT position. The implication was obvious.

 

[Deus Irae]

Gallery being moved to guard puts him in the category of bust because he was drafted to be a LT. The same can be said about Gross, who was drafted to be a LT and has played at RT because he can't handle LT in the NFL.

Claiming Gross is a bust makes no sense at all. His college career had him as a finalist for the Outland trophy as an interior lineman, and he went back and forth from guard and tackle. His NFL career saw him start every game as a rookie at right tackle, not miss a single play, and allow only 3 sacks. The next season, retirements, etc., resulted in 3/5 of the O-line not coming back and his switch to the left. He has since been moved back to the right side, where he allowed only one sack all last season, and he has never missed a game due to injury. He did, in fact, get shifted back to LT in 2006 when Wharton got injured. He is capable of playing either tackle position, but is better on the right side, as many thought he would be coming out of college. In fact, he is expected to be the team's #1 offseason priority and to get franchised if no deal can be reached.

 

[Deus Irae]

And that statement was framed on EITHER SIDE by him talking about the LT position. The implication was obvious.

No, it wasn't. It was a separate, and inaccurate, claim, different from his making an argument based upon 9 players in a 10 year span.

 

[Rob0729]

Claiming Gross is a bust makes no sense at all. His college career had him as a finalist for the Outland trophy as an interior lineman, and he went back and forth from guard and tackle. His NFL career saw him start every game as a rookie at right tackle, not miss a single play, and allow only 3 sacks. The next season, retirements, etc., resulted in 3/5 of the O-line not coming back and his switch to the left. He has since been moved back to the right side, where he allowed only one sack all last season, and he has never missed a game due to injury. He did, in fact, get shifted back to LT in 2006 when Wharton got injured. He is capable of playing either tackle position, but is better on the right side, as many thought he would be coming out of college. In fact, he is expected to be the team's #1 offseason priority and to get franchised if no deal can be reached.

I don't know if I would call Gross a bust, but he is a disapointment based on his draft position. He was drafted 8th overall. Anything less than a Pro Bowl caliber LT at that spot is a disapointment in my mind. If you draft a tackle in the top 10, you expect him to be protecting the QB's blindside for a decade or so.

I would consider Gross a pretty good RT, but do you really want to spend a top 10 pick for a pretty good RT?

 

[DaBruinz]

No, it wasn't. It was a separate, and inaccurate, claim, different from his making an argument based upon 9 players in a 10 year span.

YES, IT WAS.

No way do I want the Patriots using a first round pick on a LT. Other than QB, I don't think there has been a position with more first round and even top 10 pick busts than the tackle position. Can you even name five above average to great LTs taken in the first round from the draft after Jones and Pace were taken until today. I don't know if you can and that was a decade ago now.

I think the only ones are Chris Samuels and Joe Thomas. That's in a decade of first round picks.

The parts in BOLD are the parts on either SIDE where he refered to the LT position. Its logical to believe that he was referring to the LT position when he said Tackle position. Especially when RTs generally aren't taken in the top 10. Usually its a LT who is put at RT to gain some experience before being moved to LT.

Also, your list proved that it wasn't that inaccurate of a statement. Particularly since you mentioned players who were never drafted to be OTs, let alone LTs. And the list of RTs wasn't exactly encouraging either.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't know if I would call Gross a bust, but he is a disapointment based on his draft position. He was drafted 8th overall. Anything less than a Pro Bowl caliber LT at that spot is a disapointment in my mind. If you draft a tackle in the top 10, you expect him to be protecting the QB's blindside for a decade or so.

I would consider Gross a pretty good RT, but do you really want to spend a top 10 pick for a pretty good RT?

1.) Your expectations, as I believe I've noted before with different words, don't match up with reality in the NFL at any time in the history of the draft. It's why I reject your definition of the word "bust". Furthermore, Gross allowed only one sack all season, despite having to protect some poor quality quarterbacks. I'm not sure that he's just "pretty good" at the position.

2.) You aren't spending a top 10 pick for a pretty good RT. You're spending a top 10 pick for a tackle that should be able to play for your team for a decade. You hope that he's capable of being an elite LT, obviously, but the great thing about drafting a tackle that you feel is a top 10 talent is that even if he doesn't succeed as a LT, he'll likely succeed elsewhere on the OL. On the other hand, a safety who can't play safety, a corner who can't play corner, or a WR who can't play WR, is pretty much shot as a pick.

I trust Belioli to draft well in the first round, given history. Therefore, I trust that if Belioli feels there's a top 10 tackle available at #7, that tackle will be a quality player for the Patriots. Given that the Patriots seem to need O-line help at the RT and RG positions, and that Light isn't getting younger, I'll take the LT, thanks, and happily plug him in at RG at the beginning of his career. I won't cry if the team decides to go with a LB or CB, I simply think that protecting the franchise QB for the next 5-10 seasons is the most important thing to do and that drafting a top flight tackle is a great way to do that.

 

[DaBruinz]

1.) Your expectations, as I believe I've noted before with different words, don't match up with reality in the NFL at any time in the history of the draft. It's why I reject your definition of the word "bust". Furthermore, Gross allowed only one sack all season, despite having to protect some poor quality quarterbacks. I'm not sure that he's just "pretty good" at the position.

You really aren't following the conversation well enough. Rob0729 did not call Gross a bust. I called Gross a bust and I still feel that way because when Carolina drafted him, they drafted him with the intentions of his being their franchise LT. Not their starting RT.

2.) You aren't spending a top 10 pick for a pretty good RT. You're spending a top 10 pick for a tackle that should be able to play for your team for a decade. You hope that he's capable of being an elite LT, obviously, but the great thing about drafting a tackle that you feel is a top 10 talent is that even if he doesn't succeed as a LT, he'll likely succeed elsewhere on the OL. On the other hand, a safety who can't play safety, a corner who can't play corner, or a WR who can't play WR, is pretty much shot as a pick.

The Pats drafted Light in the 2nd round in 2001. He's worked out very well there. If all you expect out of a top 10 OT is for him to be able to play somewhere on your O-line decade you seem to have really low standards. I expect that from 2nd and 3rd round linemen. From a top 10 pick, I expect them to be amongst the best at their position by their 3rd year. Meaning, if he's drafted as a LT, then he should be starting at LT by his 2nd year and amongst the top 10 in the league by his 3rd. (generally speaking)

I trust Belioli to draft well in the first round, given history. Therefore, I trust that if Belioli feels there's a top 10 tackle available at #7, that tackle will be a quality player for the Patriots. Given that the Patriots seem to need O-line help at the RT and RG positions, and that Light isn't getting younger, I'll take the LT, thanks, and happily plug him in at RG at the beginning of his career. I won't cry if the team decides to go with a LB or CB, I simply think that protecting the franchise QB for the next 5-10 seasons is the most important thing to do and that drafting a top flight tackle is a great way to do that.

There isn't anything here that I disagree with, though I still hold that he damn well better be starting at LT by the start of his 2nd year.

I agree that RG and RT could use an upgrade. Britt and O'Callaghan aren't it. Neither is Yates. Neal has been great when healthy. Its the healthy part he's had issues with his entire career. Kaczur is a good emergency swing tackle and an above average starting RT.

One thing I'd like to say is that the Patriots haven't had an easy time with the move to the zone blocking scheme. Not sure if its because of their size or agility or what. But, O'Callaghan has been worse-off for it and I believe Neal has been worse off as well.

 

[Deus Irae]

YES, IT WAS.

No, it wasn't. Shall we now start stomping our feet, or can we actually take the sentence at its face value? For someone who likes to browbeat people about such detail, you sure are missing it here.

The parts in BOLD are the parts on either SIDE where he refered to the LT position. Its logical to believe that he was referring to the LT position when he said Tackle position. Especially when RTs generally aren't taken in the top 10. Usually its a LT who is put at RT to gain some experience before being moved to LT.

It's also logical to believe that the words mean what the words say. Furthermore, it's also logical to believe that when only 9 tackles have been top 10 picks in a decade, the argument is anecdotal at best. It's also logical to believe that some years result in better players at a position than other years, particularly when such a small sample is involved (looked at that way, drafting a LT in the top 10 has been a great move in 2007, 2002 [at least 2/3 of 2002] and 2000. It was a bad idea in 2004, the jury is out on 2006, and was a fine decision in 2003 even if the team mistakenly thought Gross would be a better LT than RT).

Also, your list proved that it wasn't that inaccurate of a statement. Particularly since you mentioned players who were never drafted to be OTs, let alone LTs. And the list of RTs wasn't exactly encouraging either.

The list was fine, and about what a standard 1st round breakdown looks like.


Lastly, from a separate post of yours, what's with your claim that Tait hasn't played left tackle?