Snow-delayed April Fool's Mock

[mgteich]

Maybe all those overworked analysts have DALLAS and ST LOUIS all wriong, but I don't think so.

DALLAS
Most have Dallas with a HUGE need for a corner. And what alternative do you offer? That they might get Aaron Williams at 40?

Surely, they can get a corner at 40 who will be better than who then can get at DE?

Let's break this analysis up.

First, Amukamara is a premier stud corner. Aaron Williams is a wannabe and may very well play safety. I think that patriots might consider drafting him in order to play safety. Jimmy Smith will be long gone. Harris is an aweful prospect. IMHO, there is a HUGE difference between Amukamara and the corners available at 40.

Yes, Watt is a stud. If Dallas didn't ahve such a huge need matched with opportunity at CB, Watt would be a fine choice. However, many DE's will be there at around 40. Jenkins is just one option.
=============================================

ST LOUIS
Again, almost ALL the analysts agree on the HUGE need for a receiver. Julio Jones is ahead of Jones on some boards. He is indeed an elite WR prospect, just what ST LOUIS dreamed of when the draft started.

Sure, they could improve their front seven with Quinn and all his potential question marks. I would just wait. There are players who would help at 47 also.

Well, WRT the other teams like STL and DAL, I focused on needs - not just 1st round BPA opportunities, but balancing first, second and third "need" priorities against their later round picks and what talent level may be available to them to satisfy other needs with those later picks.

For instance, let's say both Watt and Amukamara are rated 8.5 at their respective positions (with Watt as a 34DE). The 'Boys pick again at #40. Let's say Aaron Williams is rated a 7.0 and is likely to be available at #40. Is there likely to be a 34DE rated anywhere near that high available to them at #40. My guess is NO. So, I go with Watt at #9 and the hope that they can still get a CB who's better than Jenkins at #40 (which shouldn't be THAT difficult, really). Plus, (hypothetically) having a more productive RDE SHOULD help the pass defense some (at least that seems to be the prevailing theory around here).

Similar with STL. Yes, a WR of Jones' quality is highly desirable, based on BPA (which my exercise is NOT, as I stated). However, when everyone's healthy, they have a pretty good corps of relatively young pass-catchers, and they really need D-line help, too. So, the choice is to add a potentially elite WR to an already pretty good corps, or replace a JAG D-line starter with a potentially elite DE.

 

[MaineMan]

Maybe all those overworked analysts have DALLAS and ST LOUIS all wriong, but I don't think so.

DALLAS
Most have Dallas with a HUGE need for a corner. And what alternative do you offer? That they might get Aaron Williams at 40?

Surely, they can get a corner at 40 who will be better than who then can get at DE?

Let's break this analysis up.

First, Amukamara is a premier stud corner. Aaron Williams is a wannabe and may very well play safety. I think that patriots might consider drafting him in order to play safety. Jimmy Smith will be long gone. Harris is an aweful prospect. IMHO, there is a HUGE difference between Amukamara and the corners available at 40.

Yes, Watt is a stud. If Dallas didn't ahve such a huge need matched with opportunity at CB, Watt would be a fine choice. However, many DE's will be there at around 40. Jenkins is just one option.
=============================================

ST LOUIS
Again, almost ALL the analysts agree on the HUGE need for a receiver. Julio Jones is ahead of Jones on some boards. He is indeed an elite WR prospect, just what ST LOUIS dreamed of when the draft started.

Sure, they could improve their front seven with Quinn and all his potential question marks. I would just wait. There are players who would help at 47 also.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on our evaluations of team needs. And on our evaluations of Amukamara, who I see as being a better safety than CB.

BTW - I'm not persuaded by the fact that ALL the analysts have pegged STL's need differently than I have. Most of them are consistently way wrong about the Pats' needs, so why would I simply accept that they're infallible wrt every other team, consensus or not?

 

[Seneschal2]

MaineMan, kudos on your tremendous effort. :rocker:

On your Pats picks - :ugh: - I certainly hope BB fairs better.

Appreciate the energy exhibited here -- thanks.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

ILB - I think there may not be a single prospect that fits the Pats. Overall, I see 5-6 getting drafted in the first 4 rounds. That's weak.

C - I'm very down on this year's class. Pouncey and Wisnewski are the only 2 starting-caliber OCs in my opinion.

OT - I totally agree with you that the top 5 guys are overrated. There is no one IMO who is worth a top 15 pick. But there are about 8-10 guys who should go by the end of the 2nd round. If you count guys like Carpenter, Ijalana, Franklin, Pinkston as OGs, then OT is not that deep.

Any way you look at it, there is not enough depth at OL, DL and QB to overcome the shortcomings.

I consider Pouncey and Wisneiwski a bit inflated too, but you focus on "starting-caliber" specifically and that's where we disagree:
-- Kirkpatrick, Barnes, Pugh, O'Dowd, Fusco, Taylor, Linnenkohl, Kowalski, ... there are any number of "starting-caliber" prospects in this class if your definition isn't restricted to 'day one' starters but includes players like fifth round draftee Dan Koppen who was an injury substitution who won a long term starter's job. Center looks just fine on paper, backed up by my recollections watching these kid's on saturdays on my TV.

-- I count guys like Carpenter, Ijalana, etc. as four position players, much the way I count Mankins and Kaczur as four position players. Further, at this time in 2009, Vollmer was a 4th round projection "at best." I look at kids like UCF's Jah Reid and see a kid who can start in this league, preferably at RT, but he probably could play LT for some run first teams like Minnesota. NFL Draft Scout lists 26 projected draft worthy OT prospects, and out of the 17 OG prospects they list I count another 8 who were college tackles or could kick out to at least RT based on their athleticism. Not all are "starting-caliber," but reserve tackles have a role too. On my "board" there are UDFA projections whom I'd love to see in camp fighting for a job. Tackle is deep, and it makes guard deep - Oregon's LT is projected as a UDFA at tackle, but he was kicked inside to LG for their BCS clash with Auburn and played Fairley pretty darned well. He makes the late rounds as a guard IMHO.

-- I see any number of ILB prospects, as well as those projected to OLB and DE, whom I'd be interested in for NE ILB - that's not to say they'd "upgrade" NE's starting triumvirate. Who at this time last year was talking about Fletcher as a NE ILB? (Kudos to patchick for marking him as a player of interest.) Looking at players projected across three different positions I easily count over a dozen prospects whom I'd consider for ILB, with the proviso that some would be conversion projects from DE, OLB, or even DT.

I'm inclined to project NE with another 10-12 player draft class, despite calls for "quality v. quantity" from our fellows. I believe the talent pool at the top is too shallow, but the "depth" pool in the later rounds is much deeper then original projections of this class were wont too credit. This class appears to be 180 degrees out from what prognosticators, including myself, believed last year. I'm excited to see how NE makes out.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I'm inclined to project NE with another 10-12 player draft class, despite calls for "quality v. quantity" from our fellows. I believe the talent pool at the top is too shallow, but the "depth" pool in the later rounds is much deeper then original projections of this class were wont too credit. This class appears to be 180 degrees out from what prognosticators, including myself, believed last year. I'm excited to see how NE makes out.

I agree with the size of the draft class. I think BB loves competition and for all those that call for the Pats to have a better veteran vs. young player mix, I don't buy it. The 2009 draftees have two full years in the league and can be counted as young veterans now. And some of the 2010 draftees are not going to make a year two leap, ala Butler, and someone will need to step in for them.

 

[Off The Grid]

I'm inclined to project NE with another 10-12 player draft class, despite calls for "quality v. quantity" from our fellows. I believe the talent pool at the top is too shallow, but the "depth" pool in the later rounds is much deeper then original projections of this class were wont too credit. This class appears to be 180 degrees out from what prognosticators, including myself, believed last year. I'm excited to see how NE makes out.

I agree with the size of the draft class. I think BB loves competition and for all those that call for the Pats to have a better veteran vs. young player mix, I don't buy it. The 2009 draftees have two full years in the league and can be counted as young veterans now. And some of the 2010 draftees are not going to make a year two leap, ala Butler, and someone will need to step in for them.

Concur, gentlemen.

I don't see ANY 1st Round Talent in this entire Draft Class at:

Quarter Back
Center
O Guard
Tight End
Running Back

Mid Fielder
Strong Safety
Free Safety

***

All in all, that's ASTONISHING.

But there is RICH Depth of Talent in this Draft...

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Concur, gentlemen.

I don't see ANY 1st Round Talent in this entire Draft Class at:

Quarter Back
Center
O Guard
Tight End
Running Back

Mid Fielder
Strong Safety
Free Safety

***

All in all, that's ASTONISHING.

But there is RICH Depth of Talent in this Draft...

What about Ingram? He seems to be the latest darling for the mock draft experts to send our way.

 

[Off The Grid]

Concur, gentlemen.

I don't see ANY 1st Round Talent in this entire Draft Class at:

Quarter Back
Center
O Guard
Tight End
Running Back

Mid Fielder
Strong Safety
Free Safety

***

All in all, that's ASTONISHING.

But there is RICH Depth of Talent in this Draft...

What about Ingram? He seems to be the latest darling for the mock draft experts to send our way.

Great point, sir. Indeed, I came THIS CLOSE to putting him on that list, my philosophical objections to drafting RB's in the 1st Round notwithstanding.

I actually think very highly of Mark Ingram, but I consider his to be a 2nd Round resume, and believe that he's only projected for the 1st because of the dearth of high level talent at his position, this year.

Indeed, I would say the same about every one of the QB's AND the OT's that're projected for the 1st, this year, save Tyron Smith.

 

[bucky]

I consider Pouncey and Wisneiwski a bit inflated too, but you focus on "starting-caliber" specifically and that's where we disagree:
-- Kirkpatrick, Barnes, Pugh, O'Dowd, Fusco, Taylor, Linnenkohl, Kowalski, ... there are any number of "starting-caliber" prospects in this class if your definition isn't restricted to 'day one' starters but includes players like fifth round draftee Dan Koppen who was an injury substitution who won a long term starter's job. Center looks just fine on paper, backed up by my recollections watching these kid's on saturdays on my TV.

Yes, we do disagree. I think most of these guys will never become NFL starters. In the short term though, if we draft one of these guys, they first have to make the 53 man roster. Meaning they need to beat out Wendell, Ohrenberger, or possibly both of them. And while it doesn't sound that hard, Larsen wasn't able to do it last year. And he was probably a better prospect than most of these guys, as was Ohrenberger.

-- I count guys like Carpenter, Ijalana, etc. as four position players, much the way I count Mankins and Kaczur as four position players. Further, at this time in 2009, Vollmer was a 4th round projection "at best." I look at kids like UCF's Jah Reid and see a kid who can start in this league, preferably at RT, but he probably could play LT for some run first teams like Minnesota. NFL Draft Scout lists 26 projected draft worthy OT prospects, and out of the 17 OG prospects they list I count another 8 who were college tackles or could kick out to at least RT based on their athleticism. Not all are "starting-caliber," but reserve tackles have a role too. On my "board" there are UDFA projections whom I'd love to see in camp fighting for a job. Tackle is deep, and it makes guard deep - Oregon's LT is projected as a UDFA at tackle, but he was kicked inside to LG for their BCS clash with Auburn and played Fairley pretty darned well. He makes the late rounds as a guard IMHO.

Fair enough. I think the OT class is pretty deep. OG, not as much, but your point is well taken. Some of those guys might not project as a Pats' type of OL, but they'll still get drafted.

-- I see any number of ILB prospects, as well as those projected to OLB and DE, whom I'd be interested in for NE ILB - that's not to say they'd "upgrade" NE's starting triumvirate. Who at this time last year was talking about Fletcher as a NE ILB? (Kudos to patchick for marking him as a player of interest.) Looking at players projected across three different positions I easily count over a dozen prospects whom I'd consider for ILB, with the proviso that some would be conversion projects from DE, OLB, or even DT.

I think you are talking about conversion projects here, like Krug. I'm talking about guys who played LB in college and will play ILB in the NFL. Even if you include guys who project as Mike or Will in the 43. Last year's class wasn't particularly great either, but it was better than this year's with guys like Angerer, AJ Edds, Spikes, Butler, Washington, Lee.

I'm inclined to project NE with another 10-12 player draft class, despite calls for "quality v. quantity" from our fellows. I believe the talent pool at the top is too shallow, but the "depth" pool in the later rounds is much deeper then original projections of this class were wont too credit. This class appears to be 180 degrees out from what prognosticators, including myself, believed last year. I'm excited to see how NE makes out.

I disagree. I think this class is shallow, period. It's weak at the top and weak at the bottom, with some pockets of value. But more importantly, I think NE is better served filling some roster spots with veterans and letting the young players develop, rather than getting even younger. At some point, you're going to end up with 4 Brandon Tates or 3 Cunninghams fighting for 2 roster spots. That's not great value.