Pats 1st round picks and short term need

[BradyManny]

We sort of go through this debate every year over whether the Pats pick for need at the top of the draft, but its worth a look back at what they've done in the past:

2008 - Jerod Mayo:

rookie: 16 starts​

2007 - Brandon Meriweather:

rookie: 0 starts, used in nickel packages second half of season​

year 2: 11 starts​

2006 - Laurence Maroney:

rookie: 175 carries (split w Dillon)​

year 2: 185 carries (started whenever healthy)​

2005 - Logan Mankins:

rookie: 16 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2004 - Vince Wilfork:

rookie: 6 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2004: Ben Watson:

rookie: 1 start in 1 game (injury)​

year 2: 9 starts​

2003: Ty Warren:

rookie: 4 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2002: Daniel Graham

rookie: 6 starts​

year 2: 9 starts​

2001: Richard Seymour

rookie: 10 starts (out of 13 games played)​

year 2: 16 starts​

To me, its clear - Patriots first round picks are expected to contribute sooner rather than later. The complexities of its offensive and defensive playbooks be damned, if you were taken mid to late in the first round, you ought to be starting consistently by year 2, and if you were taking mid to early first round, you ought to be starting consistently during year 1.

Something to keep in mind when considering need & value on our Day 1 picks.

 

[ALP]

We sort of go through this debate every year over whether the Pats pick for need at the top of the draft, but its worth a look back at what they've done in the past:

2008 - Jerod Mayo:

rookie: 16 starts​

2007 - Brandon Meriweather:

rookie: 0 starts, used in nickel packages second half of season​

year 2: 11 starts​

2006 - Laurence Maroney:

rookie: 175 carries (split w Dillon)​

year 2: 185 carries (started whenever healthy)​

2005 - Logan Mankins:

rookie: 16 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2004 - Vince Wilfork:

rookie: 6 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2004: Ben Watson:

rookie: 1 start in 1 game (injury)​

year 2: 9 starts​

2003: Ty Warren:

rookie: 4 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2002: Daniel Graham

rookie: 6 starts​

year 2: 9 starts​

2001: Richard Seymour

rookie: 10 starts (out of 13 games played)​

year 2: 16 starts​

To me, its clear - Patriots first round picks are expected to contribute sooner rather than later. The complexities of its offensive and defensive playbooks be damned, if you were taken mid to late in the first round, you ought to be starting consistently by year 2, and if you were taking mid to early first round, you ought to be starting consistently during year 1.

Something to keep in mind when considering need & value on our Day 1 picks.

u talk about defensive complexity, but i dare say mayo is the only one

its easy to come in and play D on the line, ur responsibilites are pretty clear, and u dont have to worry about coverage...

we have only had 2 picks int he back 7 of the defense, and really meriweather didnt do anything his first year....

mayo is the exception to the the rule

 

[Silverquick]

Well it all depends on who is available when we pick and I am not an expert on the draft, but I would not be surprised to see BB go with a conservative pick this year. Someone solid if unspectacular, like Alex Mack, a lineman from Cal, would be fine by me.

Linemen are always good to have and they can contribute right away, so that fits the immediate impact standard that BB seems to have.

 

[mgteich]

My conclusion from your information is that a patriot frist rounder is expected to backup in his frist year (being able to start as needed) and start in his second year.

We sort of go through this debate every year over whether the Pats pick for need at the top of the draft, but its worth a look back at what they've done in the past:

2008 - Jerod Mayo:

rookie: 16 starts​

2007 - Brandon Meriweather:

rookie: 0 starts, used in nickel packages second half of season​

year 2: 11 starts​

2006 - Laurence Maroney:

rookie: 175 carries (split w Dillon)​

year 2: 185 carries (started whenever healthy)​

2005 - Logan Mankins:

rookie: 16 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2004 - Vince Wilfork:

rookie: 6 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2004: Ben Watson:

rookie: 1 start in 1 game (injury)​

year 2: 9 starts​

2003: Ty Warren:

rookie: 4 starts​

year 2: 16 starts​

2002: Daniel Graham

rookie: 6 starts​

year 2: 9 starts​

2001: Richard Seymour

rookie: 10 starts (out of 13 games played)​

year 2: 16 starts​

To me, its clear - Patriots first round picks are expected to contribute sooner rather than later. The complexities of its offensive and defensive playbooks be damned, if you were taken mid to late in the first round, you ought to be starting consistently by year 2, and if you were taking mid to early first round, you ought to be starting consistently during year 1.

Something to keep in mind when considering need & value on our Day 1 picks.

 

[BradyManny]

My conclusion from your information is that a patriot frist rounder is expected to backup in his frist year (being able to start as needed) and start in his second year.

Mankins, Seymour, Wilfork & Mayo all became established as the starter at some point in their rookie season. That's 4 out of 9. Watson, had he not been injured, also would've started. And Maroney might as well be called a starter in his rookie year, as he and Dillon basically split.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Mankins, Seymour, Wilfork & Mayo all became established as the starter at some point in their rookie season. That's 4 out of 9. Watson, had he not been injured, also would've started. And Maroney might as well be called a starter in his rookie year, as he and Dillon basically split.

You have to remember that Watson had a very capable NFL TE in Graham ahead of him on the depth chart. This Watson is a far cry from the guy who ran through the jags defense in the playoffs a few years ago. I dunno what happened, I'm guessing that he has some sort of unknown injury (BTW did you see that Ty Warren just had surguery) that is slowing him down.

Mankins is the only one I can remember being named a starter basically from the first day he showed up in camp. This years version of Meriweather is light years ahead of his rookie year.
The Pats secondary is very complicated, and I think that you probably expect much better seasons from both Whilite (who I'm starting to think can be a very productive player) and Wheatley (jury still out, but looked pretty good in spurts) next year.

The Pats look to fill a need usually a year ahead in the first round, my money is on D-line at pick 24 this year.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

u talk about defensive complexity, but i dare say mayo is the only one

its easy to come in and play D on the line, ur responsibilites are pretty clear, and u dont have to worry about coverage...

we have only had 2 picks int he back 7 of the defense, and really meriweather didnt do anything his first year....

mayo is the exception to the the rule

no he isn't........guyton played like a regular this year........in 2004, randall gay (UDFA) started 9 games and all playoff games as well as the SB......eugene wilson started 15 and all the playoff games in 2003.......ellis hobbsthe only exception is that mayo was penciled in as a starter in training camp, so he got all the reps with the first unit.......the others didn't and still had outstanding rookie years

and it is not easy to just come in and play on the D line.........wilfork took over a year to effectively switch from 1 gap to 2.........but that's a simple concept that just takes time to adjust from trying to penetrate to holding the point at the LOS......

I believe the 'rookie is lost' notion is way overblown......I believe going with a stiff like oneal instead of just throwing wheatley in there was a mistake.......

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Mankins, Seymour, Wilfork & Mayo all became established as the starter at some point in their rookie season. That's 4 out of 9. Watson, had he not been injured, also would've started. And Maroney might as well be called a starter in his rookie year, as he and Dillon basically split.

wilfork did not.......he was pretty lost at NT his rookie year.....still made some plays, but consistently left gaping holes.....which is why traylor got most of the starts.........wilfork was basically in there in passing situations

 

[tanked_as_usual]

You have to remember that Watson had a very capable NFL TE in Graham ahead of him on the depth chart. This Watson is a far cry from the guy who ran through the jags defense in the playoffs a few years ago. I dunno what happened, I'm guessing that he has some sort of unknown injury (BTW did you see that Ty Warren just had surguery) that is slowing him down.

not true.........back then the basic offensive scheme was a 2 TE set ...... especially with corey dillon........watson and graham were both penciled in as starters going into week 1

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

no he isn't........guyton played like a regular this year........in 2004, randall gay (UDFA) started 9 games and all playoff games as well as the SB......eugene wilson started 15 and all the playoff games in 2003.......ellis hobbsthe only exception is that mayo was penciled in as a starter in training camp, so he got all the reps with the first unit.......the others didn't and still had outstanding rookie years

and it is not easy to just come in and play on the D line.........wilfork took over a year to effectively switch from 1 gap to 2.........but that's a simple concept that just takes time to adjust from trying to penetrate to holding the point at the LOS......

I believe the 'rookie is lost' notion is way overblown......I believe going with a stiff like oneal instead of just throwing wheatley in there was a mistake.......

I think it's a slight stretch to say Mayo was "penciled in" as a starter. You'll recall that he took 2nd team reps alongside Hobson behind Tank Williams and Bruschi. It was a couple weeks into camp before he saw any 1st team time, and that started around players getting dinged up or otherwise missing reps. That the kid played as well as he did this year is a testament to his talent and his hard work - I loved the story about his plans to stay right here in NE and work with the coaches on getting better. Whether Bru comes back in 2009 or not, I'll always believe that Mayo is carrying the Bru heritage with him.

Your point on Gay & Hobbs not seeing any starts right away is well made, they were the standard I was using for Wheatley and Wilhite, which was proved out when Wheatley got the week 9 start - BB gives the kids a taste as they develop to get them ready before throwing them in the fire mid-season.

Another good point on Vince. He was halfway into his sophomore year, after a handful of starts as a rookie and starting all of his sophomore year, before his play at NT steadied down and he stopped trying to force things. It's been Rock of New England time ever since.

I read a lot of folks going off on rookies and players in their 2nd and 3rd seasons for not playing like All-Pros, yet history doesn't support such radical expectations. Give the kids the time BB does and know that by itself, being on the roster is a vote of confidence - wait and bash them when they get released.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

I think it's a slight stretch to say Mayo was "penciled in" as a starter. You'll recall that he took 2nd team reps alongside Hobson behind Tank Williams and Bruschi. It was a couple weeks into camp before he saw any 1st team time, and that started around players getting dinged up or otherwise missing reps. That the kid played as well as he did this year is a testament to his talent and his hard work - I loved the story about his plans to stay right here in NE and work with the coaches on getting better. Whether Bru comes back in 2009 or not, I'll always believe that Mayo is carrying the Bru heritage with him.

Your point on Gay & Hobbs not seeing any starts right away is well made, they were the standard I was using for Wheatley and Wilhite, which was proved out when Wheatley got the week 9 start - BB gives the kids a taste as they develop to get them ready before throwing them in the fire mid-season.

Another good point on Vince. He was halfway into his sophomore year, after a handful of starts as a rookie and starting all of his sophomore year, before his play at NT steadied down and he stopped trying to force things. It's been Rock of New England time ever since.

I read a lot of folks going off on rookies and players in their 2nd and 3rd seasons for not playing like All-Pros, yet history doesn't support such radical expectations. Give the kids the time BB does and know that by itself, being on the roster is a vote of confidence - wait and bash them when they get released.

regarding mayo, I believe it was the plan to have him start ASAP......hobson was jettisoned the first moment that it was realized that mayo will work from the outset........as with any rookie, you have to deal with the higher tendency for 'rookie mistakes', but the point I did not make is that none of these guys made the team regret putting them out as rookies......maybe its their fail-safe plan, but then again, maybe they are too cautious.....

sometimes you have to damn the torpedoes and go in another direction and it works out like you never thought it would........both koppen and wilson were examples of this.....guys who pretty much did not take a snap with the first unit all preseason, but stepped in and fit the scheme very well......koppen sent a probowl center (woody) to OG........

there is a flip-side of being over cautious that way.........the perfect example was eric alexander versus the colts in the 2006 AFCC.....the guy was lost out there.......I'd like to say because he just stinks, but the fact is that if he had gotten any meaningful time during the regular season, he probably would have made a play on 3rd down that he had missed, changing the entire outcome of that game.....it was that close.......the pats could have easily afforded to get him on the field during the regular season....there were 6 blowouts during the regular season and one in the playoffs where alexander could have gotten valuable PT in 2006 and not have to be thrown to the wolves versus the colts.......there was no excuse for that

 

[Seneschal2]

To me, its clear - Patriots first round picks are expected to contribute sooner rather than later. The complexities of its offensive and defensive playbooks be damned, if you were taken mid to late in the first round, you ought to be starting consistently by year 2, and if you were taking mid to early first round, you ought to be starting consistently during year 1.

Something to keep in mind when considering need & value on our Day 1 picks.

Good post, and I agree. Something else to keep in mind are two other factors:

1) Injuries to the rookie crop. In most drafts, there's always a rookie or two who gets hurt, inevitably slowing the learning curve. The NFL transition can be difficult enough, but when you also lose valuable practice reps due to injury, chances are you'll delay and/or limit your opportunities for any game action. And if competing for a starting role, it won't happen by game one.

2) Competition and experience. Let's say our first round pick this draft is a Safety. Obviously Merriweather is set at one Safety position, while Sanders and the rest represent competition for the rookie. No doubt the rook would have more athletic ability than the others, but have zero experience. This is a position IMO where a rookie wouldn't start from game one, but could later on.

If we consider these factors, the idea of rookies starting is possible, but dependent upon their health, competition for the position, and their ability to grasp the offense or defense.

 

[mgteich]

I would add that I have much greater expectations of a blue chipper than those drafted later in the first round. Depending on the draft that division line somewhere between 8 and about 12. So, I did expect a lot from Seymour and Mayo. And, I viewed Wilfork as a blue-chipper who we were very lucky to acquire when we did. I was disappointed with his progress during his rookie year.

I have much less expectation when we draft at 13 or below.

 

[makoute]

Mankins, Seymour, Wilfork & Mayo all became established as the starter at some point in their rookie season. That's 4 out of 9. Watson, had he not been injured, also would've started. And Maroney might as well be called a starter in his rookie year, as he and Dillon basically split.

Seymour, Mankins, and Mayo are the only people on that list that were starters right away. Wilfork played very little time that hear.

 

[BradyManny]

Seymour, Mankins, and Mayo are the only people on that list that were starters right away. Wilfork played very little time that hear.

He started 6 games as a rookie, which isn't too shabby, and he also started in the Super Bowl. So again, he was the starter by the end of the rookie year, and he did start every game the ensuing season.

 

[BradyManny]

I would add that I have much greater expectations of a blue chipper than those drafted later in the first round. Depending on the draft that division line somewhere between 8 and about 12. So, I did expect a lot from Seymour and Mayo. And, I viewed Wilfork as a blue-chipper who we were very lucky to acquire when we did. I was disappointed with his progress during his rookie year.

I have much less expectation when we draft at 13 or below.

I agree. Like I said, that's the difference between a guy who starts in year 1 and a guy who starts in year 2. 2nd half of round 1 may be given a year to acclimate himself, first half of round 1 is not. Obviously Mankins was asked to start right away and Maroney pretty much was starter 1B immediately.

 

[BradyManny]

I think it's a slight stretch to say Mayo was "penciled in" as a starter. You'll recall that he took 2nd team reps alongside Hobson behind Tank Williams and Bruschi. It was a couple weeks into camp before he saw any 1st team time, and that started around players getting dinged up or otherwise missing reps. That the kid played as well as he did this year is a testament to his talent and his hard work - I loved the story about his plans to stay right here in NE and work with the coaches on getting better. Whether Bru comes back in 2009 or not, I'll always believe that Mayo is carrying the Bru heritage with him.

Tank and Bru might've been practicing together, but by the first preseason game, Mayo was starter. As you said in another thread, Tank's time at WILB next to Bruschi was more or less a crash course to get him ready for nickel packages, and that the team likely didn't ever intend to use him at WILB in the base 3-4 as a starter. I think, with the ability of hindsight, Mayo was drafted to start. The only other option they would've had was to call up Seau.

 

[mgteich]

So, if I need a RG or RT in 2009 to be expected to be able to start in 2009, then the last half of the 1st round or in the second round is where I should look to draft my player.

I agree. Like I said, that's the difference between a guy who starts in year 1 and a guy who starts in year 2. 2nd half of round 1 may be given a year to acclimate himself, first half of round 1 is not. Obviously Mankins was asked to start right away and Maroney pretty much was starter 1B immediately.

 

[WhiZa]

I agree 100% with the OP. If BB doesn't make a splash in FA (ie AD), expected him to pair a draftee with a washed up vet to replace him the next year if not sooner.

Meriweather - Wilson
Wilfork -Traylor
Mankins - Andruzzi
Maroney - Dillon

This year I'm thinking OLB to replace Vrable, or SS if Harrison comes back.

 

[DaBruinz]

I agree 100% with the OP. If BB doesn't make a splash in FA (ie AD), expected him to pair a draftee with a washed up vet to replace him the next year if not sooner.

Meriweather - Wilson
Wilfork -Traylor
Mankins - Andruzzi
Maroney - Dillon

This year I'm thinking OLB to replace Vrable, or SS if Harrison comes back.

Andruzzi wasn't with the Pats when Mankins was brought in. He's already moved on to Cleveland. Its what precipitated them looking at Mankins for the LG position.