Welcome to PatsFans.com

Offensive draft needs, or lack thereof

Discussion in 'Patriots Draft Talk' started by Fencer, Apr 9, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Fencer

    Fencer Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    82
    Ratings:
    +244 / 4 / -18

    #12 Jersey

    Since it's OK in draft season to be redundant, let's revisit offensive draft needs. My claim is: There aren't any.

    QB -- obviously none.

    RB -- a very young position. We need somebody besides Ridley to bang it in in short yardage, but most of us expect that to be a vet, FB or otherwise.

    TE -- no needs, with the Fells signing. Luxury pick potential, but no need.

    WR -- loaded with vets.

    OL -- not-old starting-class players at 4 positions, plus Cannon & McDonald. Plus whichever of Waters, Light, Gallery, and Koppen wind up being around. Plus Wendell if we want him.
     
  2. Avenger

    Avenger Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,475
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +92 / 4 / -1

    #11 Jersey

    I think QB is a late round/UDFA need, Hoyer isn't likely to stick around next year and we need a QB3 for 2013. A mid to late round OG/C would be fine by me. Some reports suggest we could be looking at Patrick Witt out of Yale as an UDFA, he transferred to Yale from Nebraska.
     
  3. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,316
    Likes Received:
    183
    Ratings:
    +533 / 38 / -15

    Is your position that drafts are only about the current season? Or are you speaking about critical 2012 needs (where there are obviously none on offense).

    If you are only discussing critical NEEDS for 2012, IMHO there is only one: DE (and we could sign a free agent or two for that need (perhaps Carter, Warren or Ellis).

    Surely there are arguments that there are draft needs at WR and OL if we focus on preparing for 2013.
    =================================================
    WR
    With all the vets that will make the team, clearly some will be gone after the season. Perhaps we should depend on free agency for ALL our future wide receivers.

    OL
    Obviously the team could announce Light's retirement at any time, if he is retiring. There is no incentive to announce before the draft.

    As we look to 2013, I expect to see Light, Waters and Gallery gone. It would seem that saying that there is no need to draft an OL is a huge overstatement. After all, we drafted Solder last year, and even took a flyer on Cannon. Did we have an OL need in 2011; did we have needs serious enough to justify using a top draft choice? Many posters said no at the time.

    BOTTOM LINE
    Belichick knows what Belichick knows. We are not privy to that knowledge. However, it would seem that there are draft needs at OL and WR. WR is much more problematic since we certainly could be counting on Welker and Lloyd for 2013, plus one of the 2012 vets.

     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2012
  4. Wilfork#75

    Wilfork#75 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,842
    Likes Received:
    50
    Ratings:
    +101 / 5 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    I still have a big issue at WR. Sure we have a lot of bodies, but I don't think we have a lot of quality or long term answers. Welker will be 31 and is on the franchise tag, if they don't sign him long term will they tag him again at almost $12mil next year? Branch will be 33 and I don't see him playing more than 1 year, if he even gets through the 2012 season. Gonzalez has more IR trips than TD's in the last 3 years, and even before he got hurt was nothing special. I can't see him staying healthy and earning a roster spot. Stallworth is 31 and has only caught 41 balls since he left in 2007. I think he is here 1 year at the most. And Ocho is 34 and still doesn't know the system. Even if he does pick it up, will he be here beyond 2012?

    While there might be enough guys to fill the roster this year, what about 2013. Welker could be gone and Branch will likely retire. I can't see Gonzalez, Ocho or Stallworth being here then. So we could only have a 32 year old problem child, who is extremely talented and knows the system, but could easily clash with our QB as the only WR on the roster (Lloyd). We have seen this year that WR is a difficult need to fill through FA because the mid level guys are being way overpaid. And it is very difficult for rookie WR's to learn the system and contribute in year 1. So I think we need to draft a WR, give him time to learn the system and develop, because WR is going to be a huge need in the near future. I think its important not to be too short sighted in the draft and fill holes before they become huge needs.
     
  5. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,316
    Likes Received:
    183
    Ratings:
    +533 / 38 / -15

    Welker and the patriots may both be willing for Welker to play for a 2 yr $21M contract with $9.5M guaranteed. This is achieved by Welker playing under the franchise tag this year and next.

    Would it be so terrible knowing that we will go into 2013 with Welker, Lloyd, Gronkowski and Hernandez as our 4 top receivers? Of course, we would have the same issue with #3 and #4 WR's as this year (with Edelman as the emergency #5).

    Perhaps ONE of Johnson, Branch, Gonzales, Stallworth and Underwood (PS 2012) will be available in 2013. If not, Belichick would be going to the 2013 offseason needing a #3 and a #4 WR, a much better situation than this year when we needed a #2.

    BOTTOM LINE
    I'm fine with drafting a developmental receiver. However, we might be better off with another veteran on the squad in 2012 than in having the inactive rookie.

     
  6. ATippett56

    ATippett56 Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    10,383
    Likes Received:
    100
    Ratings:
    +472 / 9 / -18

    Trade down, pick up an additional fourth round draft pick and select Ryan Broyles, wide receiver from Oklahoma in the fourth round. Place Ryan Broyles on injured reserve for the 2012 NFL Season and allow Ryan Broyles to fully recover from a torn ACL.

    Ryan Broyles, Oklahoma, NFL Draft - CBSSports.com - NFLDraftScout.com
     
  7. Leemo

    Leemo Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    619
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +24 / 2 / -0

    #87 Jersey

    The main need on the offensive side is the o-line. Center are guard.. WR shouldn't be a need this year IMO, we are loaded at the minute, i hope we don' t draft a WR be fore the 3rd round
     
  8. Snake Eyes

    Snake Eyes Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Messages:
    5,276
    Likes Received:
    78
    Ratings:
    +169 / 15 / -10

    Which players do you like in this draft? I still think if Coby Fleener had "WR" behind his name he'd be a top 15 pick, even though he's lined up wide plenty and performed at a very high level.
     
  9. ay-yo

    ay-yo Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    574
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I'd say WR is a greater 13 need than OL however both are in pretty good shape.

    13 OL:
    OT: Vollmer, Solder, Cannon
    OG: Mankins, Connolly
    OC: McDonald, Wendell

    That's 7 useful bodies and all starters covered. Of course this means we need to keep both Wendell and McDonald this year.

    13 WR:
    Lloyd
    ????

    However w/ the option to franchise Welker gives us some flexibility. We can tag him and draft a WR high to replace him in 14. Then you have Welker, Lloyd, high draft pick as your 13 top 3 WRs.

    Unless there is a player who projects as a stud, I wouldn't draft a WR in 12.
     
  10. reamer

    reamer Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    920
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    In my mock drafts, I always include a premium (first two rounds) outside receiver, a mid-round receiver with return experience/ability, a mid-late round OT/OG, and a mid-late round OG/OC. We have very few holes on offense, but we need to start planning long-term.

    Otherwise, I expect us to go defense quite heavily. Look for trades to acquire more picks. I think this is the year to consolidate resources to target a difference maker or two high, and then trade down to take chances with high risk/high reward players late in the draft. Just my personal take.
     
  11. Wilfork#75

    Wilfork#75 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,842
    Likes Received:
    50
    Ratings:
    +101 / 5 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    There are a bunch or WR's I like in this draft that we could take in rounds 1-3. Kendall Wright, Alshon Jeffery, Mohamed Sanu, Marvin Jones, Juron Criner, Greg Childs. I also love Tip's idea of drafting Broyles, let him sit out a year and groom him to be Welkers replacement. I think we have to come out of this draft with at least 1 guy. I would like 2 and I wouldn't even be against 3 if one of them was Broyles on a redshirt.

    I'm not a huge Fleener guy and I don't think he is worth a first round pick. I think the reason he is a TE and not a WR, like Hernandez and even Dorin Dickerson, is because while he might have decent track speed, he doesn't have the athleticism and agility to go up against quality cover corners. Sure they may split wide sometimes, but they are usually against LBers, Safeties or nickel CB's where they can use their size and athleticism. I think having those kinds of guys lined up on the outside every down against quality CB's, they will really struggle to get separation and they don't have the physicality to make up for it. I've seen a lot of people talk about Fleener as a WR because of his athletic numbers in shorts, but I cant see his play translating well to the outside as an every down WR.
     
  12. Fencer

    Fencer Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    82
    Ratings:
    +244 / 4 / -18

    #12 Jersey

    Only to the extent that if you don't have a roster slot to keep somebody in the upcoming season, then he's a waste of anything higher than a 7th or maybe 6th round pick. (Gambling you can get those guys through to the PS is fine, even if Larsen tells us it doesn't always work.)
     
  13. Fencer

    Fencer Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    82
    Ratings:
    +244 / 4 / -18

    #12 Jersey

    Roster slots:

    QB (3) -- None will be filled by a rookie.
    TE (3) -- None will be filled by a rookie.
    RB (4) -- None will be filled by a rookie.
    WR (6) -- One might be filled by a rookie, but I'm guessing otherwise -- Lloyd, Welker, Edelman, Slater, and 2 survivors from the Chad/Branch/Gonzalez/Stallworth.
    Interior OL (5+) -- Mankins, Connolly, Waters are 3 near-definite non-rookies. Gallery/Wendell/McDonald is at least one one more non-rookie, and quite possibly 2
    OT (3+) -- Solder, Vollmer, and Cannon are keepers. If Light stays, he's a keeper.

    That doesn't leave a lot of roster spots for rookies. The offense seems to have 23 roster spots pretty locked down for vets, season-ending injuries aside, and 25 vets is a real possibility.

    Given defensive needs, I'm thinking the offense goes no higher than 25-6 guys on the final roster.
     
  14. Ivan

    Ivan Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    6,728
    Likes Received:
    352
    Ratings:
    +1,286 / 35 / -73

    #75 Jersey

    RB-1 draft pick and a couple UDFA's

    WR-1 draft pick and a couple UDFA's

    OL-1 draft pick and a couple UDFA's

    They will address a few Offensive needs but will focus on defense.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>