Scouts/espn.com best/worst of afc draft

[SamBamsFan]

From McShay in todays' espn .com report (link to follow, you must have espn insider to use link)

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/insider/columns/story?columnist=mcshay_todd&id=2431123

New England Patriots
Best pick: Wide receiver Chad Jackson, Florida. RB Laurence Maroney (Minnesota, first round) warrants some consideration, but Jackson gets the slight edge because he was such a tremendous value in the second round. The Patriots need help at wide receiver after losing David Givens (Titans), Andre Davis (Bills) and Tim Dwight (Jets) in free agency.
Worst pick: Tight end/Fullback Garret Mills, Tulsa. This is a tough call because Mills was a good value in the fourth round and fits the Patriots' mold as a versatile H-back who can catch and block. However, after selecting a similar player a round earlier in David Thomas (Texas), the Patriots could have used this pick to address need areas such as linebacker and cornerback.
Work to do: The Patriots' 2006 draft was loaded with value and their first two selections (Maroney and Jackson) also helped fill voids. Unfortunately, the team failed to find help at linebacker and cornerback, considered two of New England's three most pressing positions of need. Signing Eric Warfield prior to the draft helped, but Ty Law could also be in the mix at cornerback. The Patriots will continue to shuffle their linebackers to find the right combination. They are also hoping for more production from youngster Tully Banta-Cain at outside linebacker.

 

[the taildragger]

and so the media's cornerback fetish continues...

if we're "weak" in the secondary then so are 31 other teams.

 

[Jacky Roberts]

From McShay in todays' espn .com report (link to follow, you must have espn insider to use link)

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/insider/columns/story?columnist=mcshay_todd&id=2431123

New England Patriots
Best pick: Wide receiver Chad Jackson, Florida. RB Laurence Maroney (Minnesota, first round) warrants some consideration, but Jackson gets the slight edge because he was such a tremendous value in the second round. The Patriots need help at wide receiver after losing David Givens (Titans), Andre Davis (Bills) and Tim Dwight (Jets) in free agency.
Worst pick: Tight end/Fullback Garret Mills, Tulsa. This is a tough call because Mills was a good value in the fourth round and fits the Patriots' mold as a versatile H-back who can catch and block. However, after selecting a similar player a round earlier in David Thomas (Texas), the Patriots could have used this pick to address need areas such as linebacker and cornerback.
Work to do: The Patriots' 2006 draft was loaded with value and their first two selections (Maroney and Jackson) also helped fill voids. Unfortunately, the team failed to find help at linebacker and cornerback, considered two of New England's three most pressing positions of need. Signing Eric Warfield prior to the draft helped, but Ty Law could also be in the mix at cornerback. The Patriots will continue to shuffle their linebackers to find the right combination. They are also hoping for more production from youngster Tully Banta-Cain at outside linebacker.

I'll never understand why ESPN feels they know the Patriots' (or any team's) needs more than the Patriots do.

 

[Patters]

I'll never understand why ESPN feels they know the Patriots' (or any team's) needs more than the Patriots do.

I think most of us feel we know their needs more than they do every now and then.

 

[gomezcat]

The media seems to forget that we won't know how good this draft has been, until we have (AT THE VERY LEAST) seen these guys on an NFL field. Grading at this point is pointless.

 

[the taildragger]

I think most of us feel we know their needs more than they do every now and then.

yeah, but most of us can do a little better than a 10 second soundbyte on the Pats, ala McShay/Kiper et al.

"weak secondary, thin at LB, etc. etc. etc."

try stacked secondary and arguably the finest LB core in the league.

 

[PatsDeb]

These guys like to hear themselves talk...

Last year at this time Logan Mankins was a total reach by the Pats in the first round. By the end of the year he was considered a "stud" and one of the best picks in last year's draft (as was Ellis Hobbs, who everyone said was too small last year at this time). Hopefully we will continue to prove what idiots these guys are.

 

[emoney_33]

:yawn: this again? Well I guess if these guys had any real clue they'd be employed by an NFL team...

 

[zippo59]

If Mills was our worst pick then we had one hell of a draft.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I beg to disagree. I think ESPN's made some pretty simple and pretty accurate analyses of team "needs." They probably match what BB sees as areas of high concern - even areas of "need". But you don't notice BB dwelling on the word "need."

The Patriots philosophy is value, value, value.

So when I see ESPN saying they have a "value laden" draft, and then they yammer later about how they didn't fill a need, I have to scratch my head.

When the Pats get in trouble in a "need area" they compensate - it's not optimal, but they prefer this approach to "drafting to need," or bending over for some FA's agent.

Somebody please put this on a goddam billboard outside ESPN Headquarters (not to mention on these boards):

THE PATS DO NOT RESPOND TO NEED. THEY RESPOND TO VALUE.

This is not to say that all else being equal the Pats would not (possibly) prefer a great linebacker to a great runningback. But they saw the real world c. 2006, and responded to it: What would be the best runningback in many other years' drafts had slid to #21. The competition for their attention was supposed to be a second tier linebacker or corner? No, no, no, no no.

And at 35, they get this draft's best receiver? Are you kidding me?

Why?

THE PATS DO NOT RESPOND TO NEED. THEY RESPOND TO VALUE.

You don't think they could have done the safe thing, and have all the media outlets drooling over how cleverly and successfully they filled a "need" by picking whatever linebacker was left by 21? Of course they could. Most teams picking before them did just that, at one or another position, starting with the rocket scientists from Houston (I know some here like the Williams pick, but if I'm Houston I don't pass on a once-a-decade running back because I already have a "pretty good" one. But then again, they didn't "need" the running back. They "needed" the best lineman of the year, not the best running back of the decade.)

Everybody get it yet? Is there anything unclear about this?

THE PATRIOTS DID NOT ADDRESS THEIR NEEDS IN THE DRAFT. THIS IS A GOOD THING.

"Need" is not what you want your executive management to project, ever -not in negotiations, not in evaluations, never.

Think about people you would characterize as savvy about good value.

Okay, now think about people you would characterize as needy.

Which ones get taken advantage of?

The point is, when you emphasize your weakness, you make bad decisions, based on a "scarcity" mentality: You need the new car, especially THIS one, and the dealership won't have another one in your color for two months, so you better just trust the guy on the numbers...Plus he says the deal is off if you walk off the lot... Or, you need the stud defensive back (or kicker or whatever,) so you cough up some disproportionate amount of money... Or, you need a linebacker, so you pass up a far better player based on position...

When people do things out of need, their judgment gets screwy. The alternative is to make decisions based on your strengths, and based on confidence in your capability to make optimal use of what you do have, to mitigate the impact of your unmet "need."

You just assume you can find a way past it, when it is in conflict with your value choices. Then you take care of business on the value end, and get on with planning and working, to either fill or mitigate the impact of that "need." But you don't let your world revolve around the "need" right when you most need to evaluate for value.

OF COURSE THE PATRIOTS LEFT UNMET NEEDS. Pick one, ladies and gentlemen, need or value. The Pats picked value. That's why they have all that pretty jewelry.

Now, we'll see what the cat drags in from FA, and what training camp looks like. I don't think we see Law again, but possibly. I do think we get a lot of deals done while we have the cap money. I think the Pats will do that before overspending on people. If there are reasonable deals to be made, the Pats will make them - if not, they'll just have to see what they can do with that loveable ragtag group of plucky also-rans they fielded last year in the secondary, plus that nice Warfield fellow [sic.]

PFnV

 

[D-cleater]

yeah, but most of us can do a little better than a 10 second soundbyte on the Pats, ala McShay/Kiper et al.

"weak secondary, thin at LB, etc. etc. etc."

try stacked secondary and arguably the finest LB core in the league.

Just curious, what players are making up your secondary and LB in Week One? Does your assessment take depth into account at the positions?

 

[gomezcat]

:yawn: this again? Well I guess if these guys had any real clue they'd be employed by an NFL team...

Well said..

 

[hwc]

This whole linebacker thing kills me. Most NFL coaches would kill to have a starting threesome of Rosey Colvin, Tedy Brushci, and Mike Vrable. Yet, somehow "linebacker" is the Pats biggest need? Go figure.

I know, why don't we get an undersized college safety and convert him to LB like the Colts to fill our "need"?

 

[DarrylS]

Looks like all these pundits will do anything to continue the season for the bottom line, they continue their pay for view sites in hopes that we will all continue to view them and keep this crap going on...remember when the Draft was a Wed AM side panel, it has grown leaps and bounds since then, there is an attempt to continue the NFL interest 12 months per year...which suits us, but everyone wants to make a buck off of it. Who cares what they say, we will see what everything looks like in September and in late January...

 

[emoney_33]

The LB position is the most difficult position to learn in the patriots system, the patriots are not going to draft anyone who will make an impact in their first year at LB. There is a huge learning curve and experience factor to play LB in our system. Also we aren't goin to draft college LB's who are great in college but undersized for the patriots. The media just wants to see a big name college LB drafted by the pats because now that Willie is gone we are "paper thin" at LB.

Forget the fact that it takes at the bare minimum an entire year to learn to play LB in the system to be at least sufficient enough to not cause problems (i.e. Beisel and Brown early last year).

Beisel has been here for a year now, he will be MUCH MUCH better next year. With Vrabel's versatility it makes things easier. TBC should have a bigger impact next year and there is going to be decent competition in camp.

Most likely we will have situational LB's subbing in and out all year and with a solid core of Colvin, Bruschi and Vrabel, I am 100% confident that Belichick and co. know what they are doing and LB will not be a problem this season.



I also don't understand many people's desperate calls for DB help. We have only had problems in the secondary because of an insane amount of injuries the last couple of years. Maybe that will continue, but most likely not. Eugene is going to have a MONSTER year, he's going to be all over the place this year along with Rodney . Samuel and Hobbs starting... WOW I cannot wait for this season, if we do not get killed by the injury bug this year our defense is going to be absolutely dominant. Along with a high powered offense, with big play potential and clock control ability. OH man, I just can't wait this long for the season to start!

 

[patsfan13]

Just curious, what players are making up your secondary and LB in Week One? Does your assessment take depth into account at the positions?

I would see Samuel and Hobbs as the starters, RGay will be the nickel back, Warfield & C Scott are competing for the #4 CB spot, Poteat who has done OK in late seasons stints is hopeing to make the roster depending on the # of CB's we keep.

At Saftey, A Hawkins & E Wilson will start (IMO Rodney will be out till week 6), Sanders & G Scott will be the back ups, with T Jones & Mel Mitchell used mostly as a gunners on ST's.

I am very comfortable with our starters & depth in the secondary. IF we have 7 injuries like last year, there will be issues. OTOH I don't know of ANY NFL team which could sustain those kind of injuries and have a good secondary. Last year inspite of the injuries the secondary was solid in Dec & Jan.

 

[Kdo5]

The bullcrap with the secondary need is annoying. If some analysts actually knew the entire Pats secondary, we have Samuel as the #1 cornerback, he improved towards the end of the season greatly. I hope he continues that from week 1 next season. Hobbs played excellent for a rookie. Poole's injured, Starks gets the starter role and stinks up the house and finally we move onto Hobbs who played solid and showed great potential for his future, hopefully with the Pats. Veteran back ups Chad Scott, Eric Warfield, and Artrell Hawkins, then there is Randall Gay who isnt too shabby. So thats six cornerbacks, and I expect another to be added. At the safety spot, Wilson and Harrison, thats set in stone, they will problably both start, and we've got Tebucky Jones to play special teams and safety if the need comes. Sanders, Scott and that guy from the Saints. Whats that? 12 defensive backs, I dont expect Chad Scott, Randall Gay and Rodney Harrison to be knocked out again with a season ending injury. I will just hope Samuel and Hobbs stay healthy and I'm loving it.

 

[lobster]

Mills seems more like a WR than a FB. When you achieve over 1200 yards in receptions last season, averaging more than 10 yards per reception most games, that's hardly a FB. Also Mills didn't rush at all in college. I was trying to find some speed stats for him.

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

Mills=Larry Centers????