Reaching for Barwin Against Patriot-Belichick Philosophy?

[maverick4]

One issue that increases skepticism for whether the Pats (specifically the Pats) will take Barwin higher than Mayock, Brandt, or others have him ranked (roughly a mid-2nd-rounder) is that there are MANY talented DE and OLB prospects this year.

There have been many classic draft threads through the years on this forum, speculating on methodology, value groupings (by rookBoston I believe), and the myth or explaining of the Pats 'reaching' for certain players. Based on these understandings, it isn't convincing or consistent why the Patriots would use a #1 pick on Barwin. I believe it goes against Belichick's history and his own draft strategy.

Belichick took Watson and others (like Mayo) "early" because he saw a major drop-off in the next best available talent by the time his next pick came around, and possibly because he couldn't predict how long that player would last. He also moved/traded up to grab certain players because he likely projected that player to be the last left in the same caliber/talent grouping, and wanted to nab him before certain teams he knew were interested could pick. He also stayed pat and took Seymour and Warren when there were other more touted defensive players he could have traded up for (no matter how much the media hyped up those other players). Finally, he has never drafted a major positional conversion project before, especially with a high pick.

All of these reasons make it hard to believe Belichick would use a 1st round pick on a player when it's very likely there will still be similarly comparable players still left on the board.

 

[BelichickFan]

Right, not just the position change but, as you said, there's about a gazillion DE-OLB conversion guys this year. If we take any of them at #23 you'd better believe Belichick thinks he's going to be Ware or Merriman. If not there will be plenty of good choices later.

I still think we're gonna try for Maualuga. He fits for me. Big school. Big production. Loves football. Is fairly low risk in terms of (lack of) position change. Fills a need. And the next ILB is a big drop off unless you really like Brinkley.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Comparable how mav?

You keep making the distinction that Barwin's one year on defense after switching from offense is a major negative. He has good stats, but by the standard you've applied we can't compare them since he's got insufficient time in grade for equivalence. If we compare him based on athleticism and measurables, then we fall into the Mamula conundrum. If I limit myself to the arguments you've put forward in other discussions, then there is no grounds for comparison and the kid becomes a late Day Two pick for his Special Teams prowess.

Interesting situation I must say.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

There have been many classic draft threads through the years on this forum, speculating on methodology, value groupings (by rookBoston I believe), and the myth or explaining of the Pats 'reaching' for certain players. Based on these understandings, it isn't convincing or consistent why the Patriots would use a #1 pick on Barwin. I believe it goes against Belichick's history and his own draft strategy.

You are operating under an assumption that is likely, though not definitely, flawed: you're assuming that Belichick has Barwin ranked similarly to Mayock, etc. For all we know, Belichick's board could have Barwin as the #1 player available in this year's draft, or #100, or anywhere in between.

Belichick took Watson and others (like Mayo) "early" because he saw a major drop-off in the next best available talent by the time his next pick came around, and possibly because he couldn't predict how long that player would last. He also moved/traded up to grab certain players because he likely projected that player to be the last left in the same caliber/talent grouping, and wanted to nab him before certain teams he knew were interested could pick. He also stayed pat and took Seymour and Warren when there were other more touted defensive players he could have traded up for (no matter how much the media hyped up those other players). Finally, he has never drafted a major positional conversion project before, especially with a high pick.

Until last year, he hadn't used a first-rounder on a LB. Until the year before that, he hadn't used a first-rounder on a DB. He still hasn't used a first-rounder on a QB or WR. None of that means he won't take a DE/OLB conversion if he thinks that it makes sense to do so.

All of these reasons make it hard to believe Belichick would use a 1st round pick on a player when it's very likely there will still be similarly comparable players still left on the board.

This may be the oddest conclusion I've seen yet, because you're basically arguing "Because there are a bunch of OLBs still on the board, BB shouldn't take any of them." And, of course, you're assuming you know what BB's draft board looks like.

 

[BelichickFan]

This may be the oddest conclusion I've seen yet, because you're basically arguing "Because there are a bunch of OLBs still on the board, BB shouldn't take any of them."

If you can get, say, Cody Brown at 3a then you can utilize #23 better. Seems clear to me.

If we don't take Maualuga at #23 I expect a BPA pick whether it's a RB, WR, OT, whatever.

 

[maverick4]

You are operating under an assumption that is likely, though not definitely, flawed: you're assuming that Belichick has Barwin ranked similarly to Mayock, etc. For all we know, Belichick's board could have Barwin as the #1 player available in this year's draft, or #100, or anywhere in between.
.

It's true, you're right.
Belichick could have Barwin significantly higher than any other DE/LB and have Barwin in the same class as Curry.
But given how strong this year's class is for DE and OLB, how likely is that scenario? The value grouping for high potential DE/LB this year seems to have a lot more members.

 

[maverick4]

None of that means he won't take a DE/OLB conversion if he thinks that it makes sense to do so.

you're basically arguing "Because there are a bunch of OLBs still on the board, BB shouldn't take any of them."

1. I never said he wouldn't take a conversion project, I said there are lots of promising candidates this year, so why would he reach for your binkie?

2. I didn't say he would not take any of them, I said BB has a history of seemingly trading/reaching for a player when there appears to be a drop off after that player (on to a lower leveled grouping), and it is unlikely that will happen at OLB this year given the large amount of talent there.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I believe rook himself has discarded his value grouping hypothesis since it failed to account for subsequent drafts.

You make the argument that there are a group of comparable OLB prospects in this draft class, who are they and why are they comparable to Barwin?

 

[maverick4]

You make the argument that there are a group of comparable OLB prospects in this draft class, who are they and why are they comparable to Barwin?

I was getting to this. When I meant comparable, I meant potential players who could play OLB for the Patriots, not comparable backgrounds (Barwin's background is very unique). Barwin appears to have huge potential, but so don't an unusually higher number of other players in this year's class. And all aside from Curry are expected to take a few years to develop.
Unless Belichick thought Barwin's skill set for OLB was much superior to the other prospects, thus placing Barwin at a higher value grouping than the other, it's unlikely he'd reach for Barwin.

I still think rookBoston's ideas still hold. I think even in the last few drafts, an argument could be made that we made the moves we did because BB saw a significant drop in value at that spot by the time he had his next pick.

 

[mayoclinic]

If you can get, say, Cody Brown at 3a then you can utilize #23 better. Seems clear to me.

If we don't take Maualuga at #23 I expect a BPA pick whether it's a RB, WR, OT, whatever.

It depends how your draft board is ranked and how much difference you see between prospects.

I rank Barwin my #6 overall prospect and well ahead of any other potential 3-4 OLB except for Curry. (Frankly, I think Barwin will be a much better 3-4 OLB than Curry, over time; Curry is a 4-3 SLB or a 3-4 SILB). I rank Cody Brown much further down. So if BB has a ranking remotely similar to mine, then it would be lunacy to pass on Barwin at 23. If, on the other hand, he ranks Barwin where you appear to, or considers the difference between Barwin and other OLB candidates to be minor, then your reasoning is sound.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I was getting to this. When I meant comparable, I meant potential players who could play OLB for the Patriots, not comparable backgrounds (Barwin's background is very unique). Barwin appears to have huge potential, but so don't an unusually higher number of other players in this year's class. And all aside from Curry are expected to take a few years to develop.
Unless Belichick thought Barwin's skill set for OLB was much superior to the other prospects, thus placing Barwin at a higher value grouping than the other, it's unlikely he'd reach for Barwin.

I still think rookBoston's ideas still hold. I think even in the last few drafts, an argument could be made that we made the moves we did because BB saw a significant drop in value at that spot by the time he had his next pick.

That's the challenge for you, I can't know whom you might "group" with Barwin until you've listed them and described why that group is different from higher and lower ranked groups.

For example: If you were to rank deep threat WRs in this draft you might "group" Maclin, Harvin, and Heywood-Bey. The next group would include Iglesious, Thomas, Murphy, and Ogletree. Group one puts two versatile productive kids together with a less productive, but much faster prospect. Group two bunches the slower Iglesious with three burners, but his production compensates for their speed. Maclin and Heywood-Bey project to #1 WR potential, Harvin to unique abilities which give him equivalence. Group two is together because none are expected to be #1 WRs in their career, but could make excellent 2's and 3's. If you grouped possession WRs you might group Crabtree and Nicks together, then Britt and Robiske. Group one are slower, but with great body control create separation and have glue for hands. Group two offers you a dichotomy of sorts, a truly productive if inconsistent kid and a much less productive but very consistent kid.

Is NE shopping for an immediate #1 WR or a future #1? A #3 or a slot WR? At that point these groups become less meaningful. To understand where you see Barwin in a group, I'll need to know who and why, then we can bicker some more.

 

[Kontradiction]

So I guess Connor Barwin is this year's Vernon Gholston?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

So I guess Connor Barwin is this year's Vernon Gholston?

So some would have it.

 

[Kontradiction]

So some would have it.

From some of the things I've read, it sounds like he would be the logical long term replacement to Vrabel. The post you quote is tongue in cheek. I'd take him with #34 in a heartbeat, should he be available.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

From some of the things I've read, it sounds like he would be the logical long term replacement to Vrabel. The post you quote is tongue in cheek. I'd take him with #34 in a heartbeat, should he be available.

Many would agree, some of us, and I include myself in that grouping, see him as a more unique talent and would prefer to acquire him with #23 and use #34 for a DE or OL.

 

[Kontradiction]

Many would agree, some of us, and I include myself in that grouping, see him as a more unique talent and would prefer to acquire him with #23 and use #34 for a DE or OL.

Eh, it depends on how fast he rises between now and draft day. 23 is iffy but I wouldn't pull my hair out over it. OT could afford to see an upgrade at 34 so I won't disagree with you there.

 

[TriplecHamp]

Many would agree, some of us, and I include myself in that grouping, see him as a more unique talent and would prefer to acquire him with #23 and use #34 for a DE or OL.

What makes him so unique? Why should we take him over Maybin, E.Brown, C.Sintim, B.Orakpo, Clay Matthews, Brian Cushing, L.English??? Most Scouts feel that the above are better prospects.

 

[jays52]

What makes him so unique? Why should we take him over Maybin, E.Brown, C.Sintim, B.Orakpo, Clay Matthews, Brian Cushing, L.English??? Most Scouts feel that the above are better prospects.

By "scout" you mean bloggers with less insight than Box? None of us here actually know any real scouts, we just pretend to know what we're talking about.

Maybin: Too weak, unfinished, should have stayed in school. Doesn't have the trunk to play in the scheme.

Brown: Dwight Freeny with less footspeed. He's a 43 cover-2 end.

Sintim: Just too bland.

Orakpo: 4-3 end.

Clay Matthews: 4-3 Will.

Brian Cushing: 4-3 Sam

Larry English: Viable, with good inside potential as well.


You just have to watch Barwin play to see the correlations. I used to be super-high on English until I saw Barwin play. In my eyes, there's really no contest. If I was watching Cincy film prepping for a game as an offensive player, the first thing that would go into my notepad would be "STOP 5!". There's enough writing on this site from people who really know what they are talking about (relatively) and all are in agreement that Barwin is the best bet for a Jack.

 

[TriplecHamp]

By "scout" you mean bloggers with less insight than Box? None of us here actually know any real scouts, we just pretend to know what we're talking about.

Maybin: Too weak, unfinished, should have stayed in school. Doesn't have the trunk to play in the scheme.

Brown: Dwight Freeny with less footspeed. He's a 43 cover-2 end.

Sintim: Just too bland.

Orakpo: 4-3 end.

Clay Matthews: 4-3 Will.

Brian Cushing: 4-3 Sam

Larry English: Viable, with good inside potential as well.


You just have to watch Barwin play to see the correlations. I used to be super-high on English until I saw Barwin play. In my eyes, there's really no contest. If I was watching Cincy film prepping for a game as an offensive player, the first thing that would go into my notepad would be "STOP 5!". There's enough writing on this site from people who really know what they are talking about (relatively) and all are in agreement that Barwin is the best bet for a Jack.

No I mean actuall scouts, you know the ones who write the " Scouting reports"
According to scouts:

Maybin: 22 reps on the bench Barwin: 21 well there goes the "too weak" argument. He's no more of an Unfinnished product than Barwin is and he has just as much if not more upside. Maybin hasnt grown into his body and probably could have used another year in college but right now he is considerd by most a top 15 pick, pretty good for a guy who should have stayed an extra year. By next year this time he will start to max out his frame. Maybin also has the quickest first step in this draft and is graded as a 95 overall grade by scouts inc. Barwin:81 overall. Run stopping:Spent a lot of time last season working head-up on the TE as PSU's strong-side DE. Shows discipline with backside containment. Stays low and fights to keep his positioning. Can stack versus most TE's but gets washed out too easily by bigger OT's when they get into his pads. Barwin:Can get engulfed by bigger offensive tackles and going to have problems holding ground against the run if asked to line up at defensive end in a 4-3 scheme but big and strong enough to hold his own working against tight ends. Sideline-to-sideline run defender. Reliable open field tackler that wraps up upon contact. Both received a grade of 3. 1 is the highest 5 the lowest so its safe to say both need work in the run game.

 

[BadMoFo]

17 more days and none of this will matter. Yes.