Patriots potentially looking at WR?

[DaBruinz]

Ok. I know that I have said that the Patriots like to focus on the trenches in the first round and that the 6 years that BB has been here, he's done that. However, there is some news that is surprising.

According to Mike Reiss, the Patriots actually tried to move up to 21 last year to take Mark Clayton. Now, Reiss did get his information from the Ravens Director of Scouting, Eric DeCosta, so who knows whether DeCosta is telling the truth or not. I would find it surprising that he would be lying.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/

So, while that would put players like Holmes and Jackson back into play in the 1st round, I think that they are at the bottom of the Pats 1st round value group.

 

[dryheat44]

Ok. I know that I have said that the Patriots like to focus on the trenches in the first round and that the 6 years that BB has been here, he's done that. However, there is some news that is surprising.

According to Mike Reiss, the Patriots actually tried to move up to 21 last year to take Mark Clayton. Now, Reiss did get his information from the Ravens Director of Scouting, Eric DeCosta, so who knows whether DeCosta is telling the truth or not. I would find it surprising that he would be lying.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/

So, while that would put players like Holmes and Jackson back into play in the 1st round, I think that they are at the bottom of the Pats 1st round value group.

You know, everytime I see that name I get sad. Here's a guy two years older than me, from my hometown, played football against him, and he's Director of Scouting for an NFL franchise and I'm a JAG in the rat race. Bastard.

 

[JoeSixPat]

BIG mistake!!! Everyone knows we're already well stocked at WR. (I can't even figure out while Beoli is even considering a WR via trade right now - let alone DeCosta or Derrick Mason last year!)

Seriously, I'd love to see the Pats address this year's need for a #2 WR with a trade while taking Stoval or Hass in later rounds to let them develop for the future.

But if they don't secure a trade before the draft I think the gameplan shifts and that a WR in the first round is given serious consideration

 

[Remix 6]

damn if we could of gotten Mark Clayton last year..id be pretty happy because he would of done a lot better as our #3 WR than Baltimores #2 because we have a great QB and great system and this year he would of eventually taken over

 

[patsfan13]

Do anyone think that Jackson or Holmes project to be as good as Clayton?

IMO they aren't in his class and aren't a good value at #21.

 

[DaBruinz]

Do anyone think that Jackson or Holmes project to be as good as Clayton?

IMO they aren't in his class and aren't a good value at #21.

I think that Jackson could easily be better than Clayton. Clayton hasn't really shown he can do much yet. But, I will give him the benefit of the doubt because of the system he is in.

 

[Remix 6]

Holmes and Clayton have similar size..both are very fast and dangerous after catch. Clayton started off slow but then did some pretty good things last 4 games of season and thats when Boller played better after coming back. Im looking forward to see him progress there

 

[Richter]

I think that Jackson could easily be better than Clayton. Clayton hasn't really shown he can do much yet. But, I will give him the benefit of the doubt because of the system he is in.

I agree, I think way too many people on this board are sleeping on Jackson. If he goes to the right team where they understand how to use him, he'll be special.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Do anyone think that Jackson or Holmes project to be as good as Clayton?

IMO they aren't in his class and aren't a good value at #21.

It doesn't seem like anyone was doing anything but singing Clayton's praises last year... but of course draft projections don't always mean anything in terms of how a player pans out.

The stats say that #1 WRs generally come from the first 2 rounds... relatively few come from the later rounds.

That being said you can always find examples of 1st rounders failing to live up to expectations and plenty of guys picked later in the draft who over-achieved... I just wouldn't bank on that happening however - especially if you actually need depth at WR.

Its funny though that if its such a no brainer that Jackson and Holmes are major reaches at #21 (and like Clayton, they could drop to #21) then why do most drafts have them being selected well before the Pats by Dallas and Miami?

Are Bill Parcells and Nick Saban really that "stupid" and unable to assess top round WR talent?

Just because its said WR is not "deep" in this draft, that doesn't mean the "shallow" top round prospects aren't worth drafting in the first round. What it means is that the talent that remains after them is questionable.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

You know, everytime I see that name I get sad. Here's a guy two years older than me, from my hometown, played football against him, and he's Director of Scouting for an NFL franchise and I'm a JAG in the rat race. Bastard.

Went to school with Jon Stewart when he was Jon Liebowitz. Betcha he's not sweating his condo payments.

PFnV

 

[patsfan13]

It doesn't seem like anyone was doing anything but singing Clayton's praises last year... but of course draft projections don't always mean anything in terms of how a player pans out.

The stats say that #1 WRs generally come from the first 2 rounds... relatively few come from the later rounds.

That being said you can always find examples of 1st rounders failing to live up to expectations and plenty of guys picked later in the draft who over-achieved... I just wouldn't bank on that happening however - especially if you actually need depth at WR.

Its funny though that if its such a no brainer that Jackson and Holmes are major reaches at #21 (and like Clayton, they could drop to #21) then why do most drafts have them being selected well before the Pats by Dallas and Miami?

Are Bill Parcells and Nick Saban really that "stupid" and unable to assess top round WR talent?

Just because its said WR is not "deep" in this draft, that doesn't mean the "shallow" top round prospects aren't worth drafting in the first round. What it means is that the talent that remains after them is questionable.

Maybe Parcells and Saban are drafting for need, rather than value, we know BP is around for only a year or two, Saban, who knows.

I don't think either guy had Clayton's production in college, I also believe that because of Brady we don't need a HOF #1, I view Branch as a 1b WR, I would be happy with a #2 or a 1b type WR.

I still prefer trading a #3 for Stallworth, than drafting a rookie #1.

I believe we need to draft an OLB who will develop into a dominating player. This is a strong LB draft we should take advantage of that.

 

[Remix 6]

many of us would want a #3 for Walker or Stallworth but both team said they want a #1 pick..unlikely and if they get a #2..you would need to add a 4th or 5th in there

 

[VJCPatriot]

Well if you can get Stallworth for a 3rd rounder you do that deal, kind of a no brainer to take a proven player. But otherwise you gotta take your chances in the draft. I think Chad Jackson has a chance to turn out to be a special player. At worst he becomes a solid receiver for you. And don't give me the Florida receivers are crappy thing, Darrell Jackson from Florida turned out pretty darn good.

 

[Remix 6]

i strongly believe we dont need Holmes or Jackson to fill the need nicely..Givens was a 7TH ROUNDER! he came out pretty good..but if we do get 1 of them we can make them very good with our great coaching and QB.

 

[Flying Fungi]

You know, everytime I see that name I get sad. Here's a guy two years older than me, from my hometown, played football against him, and he's Director of Scouting for an NFL franchise and I'm a JAG in the rat race. Bastard.

And I get the same thing every time I see anything with Mike O'Malley in it...

f'er

 

[spacecrime]

Are Bill Parcells and Nick Saban really that "stupid" and unable to assess top round WR talent?

Just because its said WR is not "deep" in this draft, that doesn't mean the "shallow" top round prospects aren't worth drafting in the first round. What it means is that the talent that remains after them is questionable.

Yeah, that is what they mean. They are saying that the top WRs in this draft are not as good as the top WRs in the last few drafts.

And they are right.

 

[patsfan13]

If Corey Dillon cost a 2nd I can't see either Walker or Stallworth fetching a 1st.

 

[NE_PATS_FAN_54]

Ok. I know that I have said that the Patriots like to focus on the trenches in the first round and that the 6 years that BB has been here, he's done that. However, there is some news that is surprising.

According to Mike Reiss, the Patriots actually tried to move up to 21 last year to take Mark Clayton. Now, Reiss did get his information from the Ravens Director of Scouting, Eric DeCosta, so who knows whether DeCosta is telling the truth or not. I would find it surprising that he would be lying.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/

So, while that would put players like Holmes and Jackson back into play in the 1st round, I think that they are at the bottom of the Pats 1st round value group.

yea, the wide recievers name is javon walker

 

[DaBruinz]

i strongly believe we dont need Holmes or Jackson to fill the need nicely..Givens was a 7TH ROUNDER! he came out pretty good..but if we do get 1 of them we can make them very good with our great coaching and QB.

Givens didn't start breaking out until the end of his 2nd year. Do the Pats really want to wait that long for someone to be productive?