Welcome to PatsFans.com

Shudder.... Brandon Pettigrew?

Discussion in 'Patriots Draft Talk' started by cstjohn17, Apr 4, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. cstjohn17

    cstjohn17 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Messages:
    5,027
    Likes Received:
    20
    Ratings:
    +33 / 11 / -4

    #54 Jersey

    Let me be struck my lightening for even considering it...

    Brandon Pettigrew is pretty much the complete package at TE. He can't stretch the field like Winslow, etc. but who can?

    In year one he would provide solid depth in a rotation with Baker and Watson (bye bye Thomas). With all the deep speed (Moss & Galloway) there will be room underneath to operate, with Welker getting a lot of attention it is hard to imagine any of the Patriots TEs getting double covered all year. Depending on where Brady's knee is the Pats may be running the ball more than people expect this good mean more 2 TE sets (anyone remember the good old days, circa 2006, when the 2 TE set was going to change football forever...).

    As I see it the worst case has him being a Daniel Graham type (with better hands, not quite as good blocker but close) best case is he is a Jason Whitten type that can make a living with the 5-7 yard option.

    Watson and Thomas are free agents after 2009 opening the door for him to start after year 1.

    Leave no stone unturned, this is the year that I will not be surprised...
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2009
  2. mayoclinic

    mayoclinic PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    12,612
    Likes Received:
    149
    Ratings:
    +335 / 0 / -1

    I would have agreed with you before the Chris Baker signing, but Baker is essentially the same kind of package. Not as much upside, but definitely NFL ready, and a nice approximation of Dan Graham.
  3. bagwell368

    bagwell368 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    they tell you in business - sell high, buy low. TE's always in demand are in short supply this year - in terms of a total player. Somebody will reach and reach badly on this guy.

    Now if they plan on axing Thomas, then a lower round pick makes perfect sense.

    However given the draft position we hold this year, we can address immediate needs such as OLB and S, and needs for '10 such as LT, DL, RG

    If we hit it strong on the draft next year, we might need a CB, TE, WR, RB, perhaps another DL (oh oh), and maybe a C and P.
  4. jefmblrd

    jefmblrd Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    #50 Jersey

    I agree that someone will probably reach for Pettigrew, but I don't see it being the Patriots. Depending on who is left, I see them taking an OT or a DE/OLB with that first pick since there is a number of both that are projected as first rounders in this draft.
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,341
    Likes Received:
    122
    Ratings:
    +254 / 8 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    I'm not a huge fan of taking a TE but you can do worse than get a dominant blocking/capable receiving TE. I see him as a better blocking version of Jason Witten. We may trade up or trade some picks to 2010 but if we use all our picks we'll likely use them on BPA as we don't have a lot of holes to fill. I'm not prediciting it but if they both last I could see a shocker of Pettigrew/Donald Brown at 23/34 because we'd still have two 2s and two 3s to get a LB or two and a Safety.
  6. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,485
    Likes Received:
    246
    Ratings:
    +542 / 6 / -0

    Pettigrew is a strong all-around player who should be a solid contributor for years. In a different draft year, though, he wouldn't be in the 1st-round discussion. IMO you only consider him in round 1 if your team has a glaring hole at the position, which the Pats clearly do not.

    So I think we're safe. :)
  7. CoachK

    CoachK Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    When it comes to BB and big physical tight ends WE ARE NEVER SAFE.
  8. Patriot Missile

    Patriot Missile Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +61 / 4 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    I've been thinking along the same lines. I wouldn't be too deflated, they are two very capable players we are talking about after all. As much as I think about not taking a TE Pettigrew does intrique me to say the least.
  9. Patriot Missile

    Patriot Missile Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +61 / 4 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Very true lol
  10. dryheat44

    dryheat44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,369
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +78 / 2 / -0

    #75 Jersey

    I don't get the Pettigrew love myself. He's slow, soft, and has questionable hands. I think he's probably the second coming of Duane Carswell. He won't get open at the next level, and a first round pick for a blocking tight end seems excessive.
  11. CoachK

    CoachK Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    I know he is not fast, but I have never seen anything about "soft" or "questionable hands" (in fact quite the opposite). Where are you getting this ??
  12. Seneschal2

    Seneschal2 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,221
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    And he would be the third 1st rounder used on a blocking TE -- even though that wasn't the original intent when both Graham and Watson were drafted.

    Graham was suppose to be a complete TE, and he was to a degree. It's just that his time with NE ended with him needed as an in-line blocker -- which is where he excelled.

    Watson was suppose to be a mismatch vs LBs and Safeties w/ the ability to stretch the field. But inconsistent hands have made him an unreliable target in the passing game, making him better served as the primary blocker by default.

    If we want a blocking TE w/ strong ST skills, draft Bear Pascoe on day two. His presence will free up Watson to be more active as a receiver, where even with his inconsistency, he still creates mismatches with his size and speed.

    Two big thumbs down to Pettigrew the player.
  13. DW Toys

    DW Toys Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +11 / 1 / -2

    Agree. James Casey because he can do three roster spots besides stretch the field.
    DW Toys
  14. dryheat44

    dryheat44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,369
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +78 / 2 / -0

    #75 Jersey

    My eyes....
  15. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    Pettigrew could be Belichick's value pick at 23. We should remember that Belichick sees needs at TE when we see none, and values TE's much higher than we do in the draft.

    There are few here who would have trade up for Graham, drafted Watson or drafted Thomas for that matter.

    Would Pettigrew be more of a binky for Belichick than Barwin is for posters? I suspect that if we used Gosselin's final player list, Pettigrew will be close to the top of the board at 23 (probably the same for Mayock and Kiper).

    QUESTIONS
    1) Do we believe that Watson is a reasonable 2010 starter?
    2) Do we believe that Thomas is a reasonable 2010 starter?
    3) Is there a need for 2010?
    4) Would Pettigrew project to be a 2010 starter?
    5) Are the later players who project to be 2010 starters?

    #4 is one test of a first rounder. Pettigrew probably passes the test. Personally, I think we signed our 2009 and 2010 starter in free agency this year.
  16. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,485
    Likes Received:
    246
    Ratings:
    +542 / 6 / -0

    true, but if you think about #4 in isolation without #5, you'd find that a ton of interior OLs and several punters grade as 1st rounders! :)

    I agree. To recast my earlier comments, to take a TE at #23 given the current roster, the player would have to be "special" or a tremendous "value" at that point. IMO, Pettigrew is neither, especially as compared to Baker.
  17. Revman

    Revman Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I would pass on Pettigrew in round one. If he were there at 34-I would consider the value. I would take Bear Pascoe- A tough-no nonsense Blocking TE from Fresno State. He is a guy that can win this job by next season. Also solid hands-no deep threat. Consistent with great effort. Plus you can get him in round 3 or 4. Saving 23 or 34 for much more needs on defense. The type of guy that will show up to battle in practice and on game day.
  18. VJCPatriot

    VJCPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    12,347
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +46 / 1 / -4

    But Barwin can also play tight end if we need him to. Barwin fulfills BB's TE fetish and gives him a passrusher! Mark it down. Let it be done! ;)

    To put it in poker terms: I see your Brandon Pettigrew and Raise You a Connor Barwin!
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2009
  19. CoachK

    CoachK Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Well then I guess it's safe to say we won't be taking him !!
  20. AzPatsFan

    AzPatsFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    5,996
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +133 / 10 / -8

    TE Badges? We don't need no stinkin TE badjes !!:banned:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>