Random draft thoughts

[Box_O_Rocks]

Have we completely ruled out CB early? I know this class is thin and the need is not immediate after the signings of Bodden and Springs, but if Darius Butler is sitting there at #23 do we not have to at least think about it?

He is one of the options that has to be weighed at #23.

 

[bakes781]

He's being talked about as possibly the #1 CB. At #23 I have to consider it and at #34 I'm racing to the podium.

 

[BelichickFan]

Have we completely ruled out CB early? I know this class is thin and the need is not immediate after the signings of Bodden and Springs, but if Darius Butler is sitting there at #23 do we not have to at least think about it?

I'm not ruling any position out. With three #2s we can fill needs there - if there's a great BPA I'd take him - CB, WR, RB, name your position.

 

[mayoclinic]

I'm not ruling any position out. With three #2s we can fill needs there - if there's a great BPA I'd take him - CB, WR, RB, name your position.

I'm not ruling any position out, but need is a big factor in my value board. Butler is much lower than he otherwise would be because of the relative need of the position.

Let's assume, as a pure prospect, that he would rate with Barwin, Beatty and Delmas (my personal favorites, but substitute your own if you prefer). Would he be a worthy pick at 23 or 34? Yes. Would he provide as much value as those guys? Probably not the way things stand right now. Definitely a month ago the answer would have been different. Possibly in a year the answer may change again. Would I consider him? Yes. But unless you really think that the top safety or OLB prospects are very close on the Pats board I don't see enough value to take Butler ahead of them, as things currently stand.

 

[bakes781]

Even considering the need I would definitely rate Darius Butler ahead of those guys and maybe even my boy Larry English! So if I know there's a good chance that one of them OLBs falls to #34 why not take the better player at #23?

 

[dryheat44]

Even considering the need I would definitely rate Darius Butler ahead of those guys and maybe even my boy Larry English! So if I know there's a good chance that one of them OLBs falls to #34 why not take the better player at #23?

Value. Unless you believe Butler can come in and at the very least beat out three of Hobbs, Springs, Bodden, Wilhite, and Wheatley, his value to the Patriots is going to be less than the #23 pick. Let's face it...good cornerbacks aren't like good nose tackles. There will be other good corners available later, and there will be another two or three elite corners next year.

In other words, Butler doesn't fill a need, isn't a unique player (planet theory), and isn't a clear improvement over what we presently have on the roster. You could also make the argument that elite cornerbacks aren't as important in Belichick's defense, so that would also lower Butler's value.

Honestly, do we really know how well he can play corner? I have him rated in the 41-55 range.

 

[bakes781]

I dunno when I was watching the "other good corners" run they all looked like safeties to me. I do believe he could beat out Springs, Wilhite, and Wheatley.

 

[Ungeheuer]

Some ideas to toss around:

1. If we take a 3-4 OLB (Barwin, English, Matthews, Sintim, etc.) at 23 and then find that both William Beatty and Louis Delmas are on the board at 34, should we take Beatty at #34 and then try to package #47 and 89 to trade up into the 35-37 range and get Delmas? I would. Barwin, Beatty and Delmas are the top 3 guys on my draft board who will realistically be available at 23, and to get all 3 of them would be a coup. If someone we wanted fell to 58 that would be great, otherwise we could trade it into 2010 and go for values from 97 on.

2. Do we really need an SILB as a high priority from this draft? I understand that Bruschi is aging and Guyton may not be a full-time solution, but do we really expect any rookie to be a starting SILB? Maualuga may have the physical tools but I could see him having a lot of difficulty getting BB's complex defense down. I think that the probability is that even if we draft a rookie SILB our main group for 2009 will consist of Mayo + Guyton/Bruschi. If we draft an OLB prospect at 23 or 34, there is a good chance they should be ready to start by 2010. Shawn Crable has the talent to emerge as a starting-caliber 3-4 OLB by then, plus there's always Woods and even still possibly signing Jason Taylor. Any of those would leave Adalius Thomas free to move inside to SILB in 2010. Plus there are several strong SILB candidates in the 2010 draft, both early on (Brandon Spikes, possibly Rolando McClain) and after the 1st round (Eric Norwood), Micah Johnson).

3. The more I think about it, the more I hope that we can trade #23 and #58 with the Giants for #29 and #45. The only way I wouldn't do it is if there was someone I desperately wanted at #23 who I didn't think would last to 29. But there is much more value in the mid-40's in this draft than at #58. The Giants might conceivably do it if they wanted someone specific - my best thought at this point is WR Hakeem Nicks, who would be perfect for them and whom Miami is said to covet. Picks at #45 and #47 might allow us to get another impact player - a potential pro-bowler like Jarren Gilbert - as opposed to a potential solid starter at #58. Plus an extra mid-round pick would give us more flexibility to trade one of them into 2010, possibly for a 1st round pick. I really want impact players out of the first day of this draft, and the ones I think are potential impact players in our system at positions that I could see us targeting and who could realistically be available to us are Barwin at OLB, Beatty at OT, Delmas at S, and Gilbert at 3-4 DE.

4. If we did somehow end up with Jarren Gilbert out of this draft, should we (heresy) consider trading Richard Seymour this year? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to get Gilbert unless we are planning on him eventually starting, as we could get a backup DE replacement for Jarvis Green much more cheaply. Gilbert starting implies Seymour leaving after 2009, or after 2010 at the latest. If that is the case, then why not try to trade him for 2010 picks while he still has value, and use the cap space to extend Wilfork or Mankins? I know it's controversial, but I thought I should at least raise the possibility.

1.I think Barwin will be there at 34 and Delmas will be there at 47. And I'd bet there will be a pretty good tackle at 58, someone like Meredith. I'd rather take a flier on the BPA at 23 and take care of your needs that way.

2. I don't know. I think we need an inside linebacker pretty high in this draft, especially for first and second down, since Bruschi is about done. And I'm not sure about the wisdom of moving AD inside eventually when even as a younger player he wasn't particularly good in there. I think we should snatch Maualuga if he's there at 23. If not him, maybe someone like Matthews or Cushing. Although they worked out that kid Jason Williams, he'd go later.

3. I agree. I think that's a pretty good trade. Much better value at 45 than 58, and there's no one we're desperate for at 23.

4. They'll never trade Seymour. Why would they? This is a Super Bowl contender and he's a key player, if not the key player, on the defense. Plus the cap savings would be negligible.

Good thoughts overall, though.

 

[DW Toys]

Some ideas to toss around:

1. If we take a 3-4 OLB (Barwin, English, Matthews, Sintim, etc.) at 23 and then find that both William Beatty and Louis Delmas are on the board at 34, should we take Beatty at #34 and then try to package #47 and 89 to trade up into the 35-37 range and get Delmas? I would. Barwin, Beatty and Delmas are the top 3 guys on my draft board who will realistically be available at 23, and to get all 3 of them would be a coup. If someone we wanted fell to 58 that would be great, otherwise we could trade it into 2010 and go for values from 97 on.

2. Do we really need an SILB as a high priority from this draft? I understand that Bruschi is aging and Guyton may not be a full-time solution, but do we really expect any rookie to be a starting SILB? Maualuga may have the physical tools but I could see him having a lot of difficulty getting BB's complex defense down. I think that the probability is that even if we draft a rookie SILB our main group for 2009 will consist of Mayo + Guyton/Bruschi. If we draft an OLB prospect at 23 or 34, there is a good chance they should be ready to start by 2010. Shawn Crable has the talent to emerge as a starting-caliber 3-4 OLB by then, plus there's always Woods and even still possibly signing Jason Taylor. Any of those would leave Adalius Thomas free to move inside to SILB in 2010. Plus there are several strong SILB candidates in the 2010 draft, both early on (Brandon Spikes, possibly Rolando McClain) and after the 1st round (Eric Norwood), Micah Johnson).

3. The more I think about it, the more I hope that we can trade #23 and #58 with the Giants for #29 and #45. The only way I wouldn't do it is if there was someone I desperately wanted at #23 who I didn't think would last to 29. But there is much more value in the mid-40's in this draft than at #58. The Giants might conceivably do it if they wanted someone specific - my best thought at this point is WR Hakeem Nicks, who would be perfect for them and whom Miami is said to covet. Picks at #45 and #47 might allow us to get another impact player - a potential pro-bowler like Jarren Gilbert - as opposed to a potential solid starter at #58. Plus an extra mid-round pick would give us more flexibility to trade one of them into 2010, possibly for a 1st round pick. I really want impact players out of the first day of this draft, and the ones I think are potential impact players in our system at positions that I could see us targeting and who could realistically be available to us are Barwin at OLB, Beatty at OT, Delmas at S, and Gilbert at 3-4 DE.

4. If we did somehow end up with Jarren Gilbert out of this draft, should we (heresy) consider trading Richard Seymour this year? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to get Gilbert unless we are planning on him eventually starting, as we could get a backup DE replacement for Jarvis Green much more cheaply. Gilbert starting implies Seymour leaving after 2009, or after 2010 at the latest. If that is the case, then why not try to trade him for 2010 picks while he still has value, and use the cap space to extend Wilfork or Mankins? I know it's controversial, but I thought I should at least raise the possibility.

Mayo, Great stuff as usual. It makes you think.
O.K. I have a scenario based on the fact that N.O. has only three picks in this draft and are wanting to get more desperately. #14 is a good pick but they have nothing they positively need in that spot.
I think that the Pats and the Eagles have the most choices to trades as far as volume.We actually have perhaps too many picks and not enough roster spots unless the IR squad is huge...wink!

In my scenario it is a double move carefully orchestrated by BB. We trade our second round pick #34, our third round pick #89, our forth round pick #120, and our sixth #199 and seventh #234 (don't pass out yet cousins!) for the Saints #14 in round one. The numbers "points value" deal doesn't add up but the picks do, so it might make sense. Teams are not following that closely anymore. Why do we do this?

We could pick a stud there and still have a great draft (think of the picks?) or we now control the Sanchez/Freeman QB move. Detroit can't go for Stafford for the first pick (think Harrington). He's o.k. but not #1 material. They wait for #20 and hope the Jets and Bucs don't grab one or the other at #17 or #19. Or even the Bears at #18 or Vikings at #22 taking a QB makes sense.

I say the Lions are the best partner. Trade #14 to the Lions for #20 and their third rounder (almost like a second) #65.

Now the Lions get #1, #14, #33 and #82 (from Dallas) in the first hundred and get the best OT (or Curry) and pick their QB at #14.

The Pats now get #20,#23,#47.#58,#65,#97,#170,#207.

I have some new thoughts for picks here not everyone will like:

#20=Andre Smith OT-He slides and has the best natural talent. He gets a year or two to mature. The Saban connection. I am not a fan of an OL in the top two rounds (rather have Lang later on) but you have to consider Smith here.

#23=Percy Harvin WR-BPA (you choose then?)and he fills a return spot, #4 WR, #5 RB in the Reggie Bush mold. The Meyer connection. He backs up Galloway and Lewis he should beat out.

#47=Louis Delmas S -Might still be here. If not Sean Smith as a Safety who can play CB too, but the coverage by our Safety position will upgrade. He is 217lbs. Too early for Moore.

#58 Jarron Gilbert DT/DE-Depth for a DL that will change in 2010. Michael Johnson as my backup pick for 6' 7" OLB and 4.49 speed but I think we get Taylor or Peppers (Peppers we give up #23).

#65 James Casey TE-The TE depth chart will change in 2010. Remember how ticked BB was to lose Garret Mills? This guy is bigger and better and a "Wildcat" back (called Thor) with 46 carries at Rice, 6 TDs and a 4.6 average. Scheduled to be the Rice starting QB if he does not declare.

#97 Paul Kruger ILB-Versatilty to play DE but a perfect ILB choice to get some time while Teddy is still here. 260 LBS, Decent speed, can drop back. Good sack moves. Better upside then Rey or "Little Animal"? Back up pick is Jasper Brinkley ILB. Very much under the radar. Thumper with great speed. Recovered full now from ACL. Came on at the end of the season. Played at 262lbs.

#170 Deven Moore RB-Grooming for the Faulk job. Great hands. Can take some carries ala Steve Slaton. Back up pick Johnny Knox, WR speed merchant. Coming on.

#210 Lonnie Harvey NT-A back up for Vince. The Pats have taken interest in this kid. He is 6'3" and 346 lbs. He can move. Has some sacks and blocked kicks. He does not look or perform like a lump. A small school project but very high football I.Q. Why not?

DW Toys

 

[mayoclinic]

Even considering the need I would definitely rate Darius Butler ahead of those guys and maybe even my boy Larry English! So if I know there's a good chance that one of them OLBs falls to #34 why not take the better player at #23?

That's the difference between us. You see English as a nice player but drop him like a hot potato for Butler, when we don't even have a need at CB. I put Connor Barwin as my favorite 3-4 OLB prospect since 2005 and would take him over Butler and English together. (That's pushing it, but I'm trying to make a point here.)

 

[bakes781]

That's the difference between us. You see English as a nice player but drop him like a hot potato for Butler, when we don't even have a need at CB. I put Connor Barwin as my favorite 3-4 OLB prospect since 2005 and would take him over Butler and English together. (That's pushing it, but I'm trying to make a point here.)

I said maybe I still have a few weeks to decide. lol

But yeah I don't have a player that I must have at #23 unless someone falls from that top 20 like a Jenkins or E. Brown. I'd be happy with Barwin, English or Matthews at #34. Just slightly more so if it were English.

 

[JoeShmoe]

I'll stick to my guns and take Beatty at #23, Barwin/Delmas at #34, OLB/S at #47 (depending who we got at #34) and Unger/Wood at #53, Brinkley at #89

With Jason Taylor maybe coming and 4 OLB's on the roster, 2 young in Woods and Crable, in I just don't see the NE FO being all over Barwin as others here do. I think its been said (a lot!) that he has a great ceiling but were not sure of the floor and I woudn't want to base my entire draft strategy around one guy and potentially lose a lot of flexibility. In a deep draft I think we have to be really sold on the guy to trade up for him - but I like the NYG trade idea although I cant see it happening

Of course we may end doing something no-one saw coming like getting Peppers trading into the top 15 or most likely be led by what others do on the day and who's left.

My bet is quite a few teams will look to trade down and into the second (where there's a lot of value) and look to NE with all the picks they have as a possible partner

 

[mayoclinic]

I'll stick to my guns and take Beatty at #23, Barwin/Delmas at #34, OLB/S at #47 (depending who we got at #34) and Unger/Wood at #53, Brinkley at #89

With Jason Taylor maybe coming and 4 OLB's on the roster, 2 young in Woods and Crable, in I just don't see the NE FO being all over Barwin as others here do. I think its been said (a lot!) that he has a great ceiling but were not sure of the floor and I woudn't want to base my entire draft strategy around one guy and potentially lose a lot of flexibility. In a deep draft I think we have to be really sold on the guy to trade up for him - but I like the NYG trade idea although I cant see it happening

Of course we may end doing something no-one saw coming like getting Peppers trading into the top 15 or most likely be led by what others do on the day and who's left.

My bet is quite a few teams will look to trade down and into the second (where there's a lot of value) and look to NE with all the picks they have as a possible partner

Good scenario and good bet. Your logic is quite reasonable.

Regarding trades, I can realistically see 3 first day trades which appeal to me right now:

1. Trade #23 and 58 to the Giants for #29 and 45. This would work if the Giants have someone to move up for (my guess is WR Hakeem Nicks, with Miami rumored to like him) and if the Pats see a good chance of Beatty or Barwin lasting to #29.

2. Trade #47 and 89 to St. Louis/Cleveland/Seattle for #35-37. In your scenario, if Beatty and Barwin are taken at 23 and 34 and Delmas is still on the board then I think a move up to secure him is quite reasonable, if the Pats end up liking him more than the other safety prospects.

3. Trade #45 for a 2010 1st round pick. There will still be borderline 1st round talent at pick 45, and some team may well want to get their guy and be willing to give up a 2010 1st. My best guess is New Orleans, who has no 2nd and 3rd and needs a safety badly, but there are other possibilities.

 

[JoeShmoe]

Good scenario and good bet. Your logic is quite reasonable.

Regarding trades, I can realistically see 3 first day trades which appeal to me right now:

1. Trade #23 and 58 to the Giants for #29 and 45. This would work if the Giants have someone to move up for (my guess is WR Hakeem Nicks, with Miami rumored to like him) and if the Pats see a good chance of Beatty or Barwin lasting to #29.

2. Trade #47 and 89 to St. Louis/Cleveland/Seattle for #35-37. In your scenario, if Beatty and Barwin are taken at 23 and 34 and Delmas is still on the board then I think a move up to secure him is quite reasonable, if the Pats end up liking him more than the other safety prospects.

3. Trade #45 for a 2010 1st round pick. There will still be borderline 1st round talent at pick 45, and some team may well want to get their guy and be willing to give up a 2010 1st. My best guess is New Orleans, who has no 2nd and 3rd and needs a safety badly, but there are other possibilities.

I would definitely do #1 and #2 and my guess is BB will stockpile one of these until next year but id still be tempted to take one of the OL later in the second esp if someone like Unger/Meredith drops

 

[captain stone]

Some ideas to toss around:

1. If we take a 3-4 OLB (Barwin, English, Matthews, Sintim, etc.) at 23 and then find that both William Beatty and Louis Delmas are on the board at 34, should we take Beatty at #34 and then try to package #47 and 89 to trade up into the 35-37 range and get Delmas? I would.
I wouldn't. I would rather take Beatty at 34 and then see who's available at 47. I want to use all of our picks, either this year or as trades into next year. I'm generally not a fan of 2-for-1s.

2. Do we really need an SILB as a high priority from this draft? I understand that Bruschi is aging and Guyton may not be a full-time solution, but do we really expect any rookie to be a starting SILB? Maualuga may have the physical tools but I could see him having a lot of difficulty getting BB's complex defense down. I think that the probability is that even if we draft a rookie SILB our main group for 2009 will consist of Mayo + Guyton/Bruschi. If we draft an OLB prospect at 23 or 34, there is a good chance they should be ready to start by 2010. Shawn Crable has the talent to emerge as a starting-caliber 3-4 OLB by then, plus there's always Woods and even still possibly signing Jason Taylor. Any of those would leave Adalius Thomas free to move inside to SILB in 2010. Plus there are several strong SILB candidates in the 2010 draft, both early on (Brandon Spikes, possibly Rolando McClain) and after the 1st round (Eric Norwood), Micah Johnson).
There doesn't appear to be many strong candidates at SILB in the top-100, unless you are willing to gamble that one of the OLB/DEs (Sintim, Cushing, English) can transition to that position. I have serious doubts about anybody's ability to change from playing in space in college to playing inside a tornado in the pros.
By drafting an OLB/DE early, the depth that pick would provide at OLB could allow Adalius to play SILB this season, esp. if the other OLBs (Woods, Crable, TBC, Redd, Craig, and - I hope - Jason Taylor) show during MC & TC that they are capable of providing acceptable pass-rush w/o Adalius on the outside.
I am still frustrated that the FO didn't sign Andra Davis, and hasn't signed any decent SILB whatsoever.

3. The more I think about it, the more I hope that we can trade #23 and #58 with the Giants for #29 and #45. The only way I wouldn't do it is if there was someone I desperately wanted at #23 who I didn't think would last to 29. But there is much more value in the mid-40's in this draft than at #58. The Giants might conceivably do it if they wanted someone specific - my best thought at this point is WR Hakeem Nicks, who would be perfect for them and whom Miami is said to covet. Picks at #45 and #47 might allow us to get another impact player - a potential pro-bowler like Jarren Gilbert - as opposed to a potential solid starter at #58. Plus an extra mid-round pick would give us more flexibility to trade one of them into 2010, possibly for a 1st round pick. I really want impact players out of the first day of this draft, and the ones I think are potential impact players in our system at positions that I could see us targeting and who could realistically be available to us are Barwin at OLB, Beatty at OT, Delmas at S, and Gilbert at 3-4 DE.
If the Jints offered us 29 & 45 for 23 & 58, I would do it, too, because most of the guys I would consider taking at 23 should still be available at 29.

4. If we did somehow end up with Jarren Gilbert out of this draft, should we (heresy) consider trading Richard Seymour this year? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to get Gilbert unless we are planning on him eventually starting, as we could get a backup DE replacement for Jarvis Green much more cheaply. Gilbert starting implies Seymour leaving after 2009, or after 2010 at the latest. If that is the case, then why not try to trade him for 2010 picks while he still has value, and use the cap space to extend Wilfork or Mankins? I know it's controversial, but I thought I should at least raise the possibility.

I, too, would be willing to listen to offers for $eymour & his cap hit - or at least Jarvis Green's cap hit - provided that we do indeed draft Gilbert.