Metaphors
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2005
- Messages
- 3,670
- Reaction score
- 0
I have to ask myself if #56 this year and a first next year is worth having Wilkerson for all of 2011 and 2012. I guess we need to see who we take at #56 first.
Belichick had to know that Wilkerson wouldn't last to 33 and he would likely go to the division rival Jets. While the Jets and Pats have different schemes, they are looking for the same thing in 3-4 DEs. If Belichick thought that Wilkerson was starter-quality, he would have drafted him.
My opinion...Belichick has evolved his thinking about the DL. NT is a premium position and the Pats are set there. It seems like he doesn't want to invest (salary or draft picks) in a base 3-4 end like with Seymour and Warren. Since a lot of what they do is eat up blockers, that physical makeup and skill set can be fulfilled by vet pickups (G.Warren), 2nd tier picks (Brace) and developmental types (Deaderick). This year brings Shroud and a host of non-1st round block-eaters (Jenkins, Thornton, Neild, Kearse, etc).
Someone on sirius radio said BB has a trade lined up for #33 and it involves a 3rd and 7th this year and a first next year. No mention of which team was trading with us.
Possibly the Raiders. 6pm is (barely) before Al's bedtime and he has to be thinking QB of the future. There are 5 teams considering QB before the Raiders pick at #48 (Buffalo, Cincinnati, Arizona, Washington, SF). Not all will take QBs but Al might be locked onto Kaepernick and not willing to risk losing him to any of those 5 teams.
That being said, moving from 33 to 81 is too far in this draft...plus the Raiders have more pressing needs outside of QB. I'll bet any trade for #33 will be a smaller jump (Washington at #41?) to get Dalton ahead of Cincinnati and Arizona.