RB in round 1?

[DaBruinz]

I think its a matter of getting a starter, a plug and play guy. I think that a OL or a DL not only has a higher chance of being a bust but also requires more coaching to get on the field. This is likely the last time we can get the highest rated RB to put alongside TB, and that cant be overstated. Elway got his rings because of TD, Ingram could be that for this team. Personally I want a plug and play DE/OLB like everyone else here....and would love to get both Watt and Carimi in the first and not resign Light, pick up Moffit in the 3rd and make Wisconsin the next Florida. Wishful thinking..

You do realize that TD was a 6th round pick, though, yes??

An No, Ingram isn't close to being the type of runner that Terrell Davis was.

 

[DaBruinz]

I never said that. I think both lines need to be addressed in the draft, hopefully sooner than later. But do you not think improving the RBs wouldn't help out the passing game, Brady's health, etc? We have a decent, young solid group in Green Ellis / Woodhead. Throwing a Ingram, Leshoure, Murray, whatever into that mix along with a good veteran signing or two could push it into one of the better backfields in the league. Even if we got Watt at 17 the general consensus is he still needs to grow / gain strength. And what about Wilkerson? He would probably be a rotational player at best starting out? Pouncey 2 is not Pouncey 1, is he ready to start an entire season? It seems most people think the tackles past the first two top guys would be a reach at 17. We could add a running back that could make an instant impact on a 14-2 team. All I'm trying to say is running back should definitely be a first round / second round consideration depending on how draft day plays out.

No. Mark Ingram wouldn't help out the Passing game right now. Why? Because Mark Ingram isn't that type of game changing back. And he wouldn't make a damn bit of difference if the O-line is mediocre to below average and can't block..

As it stands right now, the Pats need a starting OT (LT/RT is dependent on what they do with Vollmer) and an upgrade at RG. Without those, the running game isn't improving.

 

[Potstickas]

I would also consider bringing back daniel graham to duke it out against crumpler for the 3rd TE.......the last time the pats OL was considered tough was when he was here. he's perfect for knocking OLB's around.

Graham was very good in pass blocking, but crumpler was heads and shoulders better than graham in run blocking.

Add in Crumpler's leadership skills, and the two are not even comparable.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yeah, and some people can drive a car steering with their feet but that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Get real.

You're kind of making my point for me. Just because the team won with Smith as the RB, people dismiss the position. Well, when one spot is a weakness, others have to make up for it. Back when Smith was racking up 4.3, 3.9 and 3.5 ypc, and Brady was still "game manager" Brady, the team had a defense that could pick up the slack. This team doesn't, so the idea that it's ok to have crap at RB just doesn't hold water.

 

[patchick]

You're kind of making my point for me. Just because the team won with Smith as the RB, people dismiss the position. Well, when one spot is a weakness, others have to make up for it. Back when Smith was racking up 4.3, 3.9 and 3.5 ypc, and Brady was still "game manager" Brady, the team had a defense that could pick up the slack. This team doesn't, so the idea that it's ok to have crap at RB just doesn't hold water.

Even though I'm constitutionally against first-round RBs, I agree with your basic point. You can make up for weaknesses with strengths, but that doesn't mean they aren't weaknesses. I'd love an upgrade at RB, I just think that this team will get a better return from drafting DL and OL in this draft.

 

[Snake Eyes]

You're kind of making my point for me. Just because the team won with Smith as the RB, people dismiss the position. Well, when one spot is a weakness, others have to make up for it. Back when Smith was racking up 4.3, 3.9 and 3.5 ypc, and Brady was still "game manager" Brady, the team had a defense that could pick up the slack. This team doesn't, so the idea that it's ok to have crap at RB just doesn't hold water.

Who is saying that crap at RB is ok? I certainly want to upgrade, I just don't want spend a 1st rounder on someone who isn't that much of an upgrade IMO, that seems to be the general opinion.

 

[patsinthesnow]

2008 NFL Draft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first 3 RBs taken in one of the best RB classes ever:

4th Darren Mcfadden
13th Johnathan Stewart
22nd Felix Jones

RBs taken after those 3

23rd Rashard Mendenhall
24th Chris Johnson
44th Matt Forte
55th Ray Rice
73rd Jamaal Charles
149th Tim Hightower
227th Peyton Hillis
Undrafted BJGE
Undrafted Woodhead
Undrafted Tolbert

Enough with RB in round 1!

 

[meggett]

The first 3 RBs taken in one of the best RB classes ever:

4th Darren Mcfadden
13th Johnathan Stewart
22nd Felix Jones

RBs taken after those 3

23rd Rashard Mendenhall
24th Chris Johnson
44th Matt Forte
55th Ray Rice
73rd Jamaal Charles
149th Tim Hightower
227th Peyton Hillis
Undrafted BJGE
Undrafted Woodhead
Undrafted Tolbert

Enough with RB in round 1!

your kind of making my point for me...that was a deep RB class, so you would benefit from not picking a RB in the first round that year because there were other good backs to be had later ( obviously hindsight is 20/20 now, who saw Peyton Hillis coming, i mean cmon). This year there is only one consensus first round RB (Ingram) and it is very deep at DE/OLB. so wouldnt it be wise to grab the best RB in the draft and then attack other positions OL, DL and OLB? at the end of the day, i guess it really just comes down to if you think Ingram is a good player or not. I think he is/will be good in the NFL. So i think hes worth the pick.

 

[DaBruinz]

your kind of making my point for me...that was a deep RB class, so you would benefit from not picking a RB in the first round that year because there were other good backs to be had later ( obviously hindsight is 20/20 now, who saw Peyton Hillis coming, i mean cmon). This year there is only one consensus first round RB (Ingram) and it is very deep at DE/OLB. so wouldnt it be wise to grab the best RB in the draft and then attack other positions OL, DL and OLB? at the end of the day, i guess it really just comes down to if you think Ingram is a good player or not. I think he is/will be good in the NFL. So i think hes worth the pick.

You're argument was that the the 1st round running backs that led the league in rushing went to bad teams. That was proven wrong. Only 2 of the 6 1st rounders went to "bad teams".

Also, just because Ingram is the "only 1st round rated RB" doesn't mean squat. The depth, over-all, at RB is thin. If you were to compare Ingram to the 2008 crew, he might be a 3rd or 4th round pick. He certainly wouldn't have gone before Jamaal Charles.

So, why use a 1st round pick on lesser talent, regardless of the fact that he's rated as a 1st round RB.

 

[patsinthesnow]

your kind of making my point for me...that was a deep RB class, so you would benefit from not picking a RB in the first round that year because there were other good backs to be had later ( obviously hindsight is 20/20 now, who saw Peyton Hillis coming, i mean cmon). This year there is only one consensus first round RB (Ingram) and it is very deep at DE/OLB. so wouldnt it be wise to grab the best RB in the draft and then attack other positions OL, DL and OLB? at the end of the day, i guess it really just comes down to if you think Ingram is a good player or not. I think he is/will be good in the NFL. So i think hes worth the pick.

In my personal opinion I don't feel Ingram is a power/franchise RB in the NFL. He's projected 1st round because the class is so thin and based off his 2009 Heisman season (His teammate Richardson was better in 2010).

The Pats need a RB that can split carries, and I'm a fan of other backs in this draft for that role more than Ingram. I like Kendall Hunter and John Clay to be that guy.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

You're kind of making my point for me. Just because the team won with Smith as the RB, people dismiss the position. Well, when one spot is a weakness, others have to make up for it. Back when Smith was racking up 4.3, 3.9 and 3.5 ypc, and Brady was still "game manager" Brady, the team had a defense that could pick up the slack. This team doesn't, so the idea that it's ok to have crap at RB just doesn't hold water.

I actually liked Smith for the same reasons I like Benny. They're not spectacular, but consistently fall forward for positive yardage. In that respect, I don't consider them weaknesses. They weren't really home-run threats, but they put the offense in good situations consistently, which was a good complement to Brady's strengths in the short/intermediate passing game.

You're right about the defense carried the team early on, no doubt. And I'm not saying I'd be against a Pro Bowl caliber back. The team was much better with Corey Dillon back there. But it isn't essential for our offense like it would be for some others.

 

[Off The Grid]

2008 NFL Draft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first 3 RBs taken in one of the best RB classes ever:

4th Darren Mcfadden
13th Johnathan Stewart
22nd Felix Jones

RBs taken after those 3

23rd Rashard Mendenhall
24th Chris Johnson
44th Matt Forte
55th Ray Rice
73rd Jamaal Charles
149th Tim Hightower
227th Peyton Hillis
Undrafted BJGE
Undrafted Woodhead
Undrafted Tolbert

Enough with RB in round 1!

BOO Yah!! PREACH it, Brother Snow!! :rocker:

 

[Spike]

I'd much rather see BB spend coin on a DeAngelo Williams, for example, and draft OLB/DE/OG with the first 3 picks. The talent lines up much better that way, IMO.

I like this plan.

 

[Spike]

Agreed. Obviously, an RB drafted at #17 is likely to be much better than one drafted later. The question is whether the TEAM is going to be better with, say, RB #17 and DE #92 or the reverse.

Take your pick. (Let's assume for the exercise that #28 is an OT, #33 OLB, #60 OG, #74 traded for a 2012 2nd.):

17. DE J.J. Watt + 92. RB Delone Carter
17. RB Mark Ingram + 92. DE Lawrence Guy

You're tailoring the picks to make your argument. Very disingenuous.

 

[Spike]

Fair point. But if you look at the draft order, there are only two 3-4 teams picking between our pick at 17 and 28. ( maybe 3, i dont know what KC runs), so not factoring in trades, which is impossible anyway, if we are looking for a 3-4 DE or OLB at 17, there is a good chance he or someone close in value will be there at 28.

17 New England Patriots 3-4
18 San Diego Chargers 3-4
19 New York Giants 4-3
20 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 4-3
21 Kansas City Chiefs ?
22 Indianapolis Colts 4-3
23 Philadelphia Eagles 4-3
24 New Orleans Saints 4-3
25 Seattle Seahawks 4-3
26 Baltimore Ravens 3-4
27 Atlanta Falcons 4-3
28 New England Patriots 3-4

Very well done. Good info here. :rocker:

 

[Spike]

Ack please no. There should be a rule for the Patriots along the lines of No-First-Round-RBs and it should be filed with the No-first-round-TEs and No-WRs-from-Florida. Actually never draft another WR in the early rounds.

When was the last time the Patriots drafted an impact RB? Curtis Martin in 1995? Sam Cunningham in 73?

When was the last time the Patriots drafted an impact WR? Terry Glenn in 1996? Irving Fryar?

How about the WR busts? This is a long list headed by Chad Jackson. Also don't forget Tony Simmons and Bethel Johnson.

No that Patriots should stick to what they do best; draft for defense and OL.

I've love to see them do this. I would bet my house they won't, as Bill will almost certainly take one (or more) of those picks and do his usual trading up for future picks (which has worked out very well). But putting high picks towards defense and OL would make me happy.

Taking the RB is just the sexy thing.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Fair point. But if you look at the draft order, there are only two 3-4 teams picking between our pick at 17 and 28. ( maybe 3, i dont know what KC runs), so not factoring in trades, which is impossible anyway, if we are looking for a 3-4 DE or OLB at 17, there is a good chance he or someone close in value will be there at 28.

17 New England Patriots 3-4
18 San Diego Chargers 3-4
19 New York Giants 4-3
20 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 4-3
21 Kansas City Chiefs ?
22 Indianapolis Colts 4-3
23 Philadelphia Eagles 4-3
24 New Orleans Saints 4-3
25 Seattle Seahawks 4-3
26 Baltimore Ravens 3-4
27 Atlanta Falcons 4-3
28 New England Patriots 3-4

It's not that clear cut a thing. SD, KC, Bal all play some version of a 3-4, then you have Philly who consistently targets the same defenders as NE and NYG whose DTs are often players whom NE would like for DE, NO is trying to emulate NE, and Atlanta has a NE GM who is looking for the same kind of character players, even if they run a different scheme. So if NE thought Ryan Kerrigan was a high character edge rusher for OLB, Philly, NYG, and ATL would love the same kind of player for DE or Sam LB. I count seven clubs who would love to know the NE draft board because the same players are likely in the same place on their boards.

 

[jeffbiologist]

You do realize that TD was a 6th round pick, though, yes??

An No, Ingram isn't close to being the type of runner that Terrell Davis was.

Yes I realize he was a 6th round pick, but would you have argued if he were drafted in the first??? He certainly had the value didnt he? Ingram is safely predicted to be better than Davis was predicted, maybe he will turn out better you simply dont know. Its easy to pick a RANDOM RB in the middle or low rounds as an example, but the bust rate is far far lower in the first round, particularly with the consensus #1 RB. That said, I still wouldnt do it myself but I could understand if BB did.

 

[tricktak]

BJGE will probably drop off a little from last year but I think he along with Woodhead did enough to convince the Patriots that running back isn't as big of a need anymore. They have other need they need to go for besides running back. I do think they will get a running but not until the 3rd or 4th round. Aat that point I really like Kendall Hunter, When I watch tape of him he reminds me of another who was drafted in that range, Maurice Jones-Drew. Hunter is similar in size (5'6") and running style to Jones-Drew. He's a true late round GEM.