The 2012 Combine Thread

[Deus Irae]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

Ok, so Vincent Jackson is a beast of a receiver at 6'5, 235lb, yet Fleener would obviously stink in that role, though he's already performed just fine when lining up wide, because he's an inch taller and 10lbs heavier

Vincent Jackson is a wide receiver playing wide receiver. He was also taken at #61 in the draft, not in the first round or early in the second.

Having RG3 play a different position would be stupid because of the opportunity costs in the trade cost as well as the fact that whomever else would likely be much less effective at the QB position.

I love how you're trying to act as if the trade cost is relevant to the notion of stocking up with RGIII, when the point is that teams don't keep the QB position stocked with multiple elite QBs in today's game because there's a salary cap. You then play the apples/oranges card by ignoring the entire point of my original comment. It doesn't work as a gambit, but it's been fun to read.

The value of Fleener would have to be weighed against the option of getting someone else, what do they provide relative to him. Assuming he's available in the early-mid 2nd we'd have to compare what's available to the value of Fleener, and I think he has more value that most of the players mocked to those spots, if you disagree that's fine, go ahead and make your case why other guys would have more impact.

The case has been made time and again. The Patriots draft on a value basis, which combined talent, need, positional value, etc... Given the team's needs and the players that should be available, taking the TE there would be a major mistake, value-wise.

Finally, does Ahern have additional value because he can line up wide and also run the ball? I always thought the Marshall Faulk had extra impact because of his ability as a receiver, does Cam Newton cause problems for the defense because of his ability to run with the ball?

Hernandez has value because he's defended as a 'traditional' TE, but he causes matchup problems by NOT playing as a 'traditional' TE. This is a product both of him being a tweener and of Brady's/NE's ability to find ways to take him outside the traditional TE roles. However, if you toss in yet another TE, you undercut such a process, because the opposing team isn't going to have to defend 3 TEs as hybrids, since the field isn't really big enough for that.

Being able to do many things is a good thing, both Gronk and Ahern have lined up wide, why would BB be so stupid to use a non-WR as a WR with those two?

No, being able to do many things is meaningless. Being able to do many things well is a good thing. BB and company are able to use Gronk and Hernandez as non-traditionals because they've got other players in playing traditional roles. If Branch and Welker couldn't catch passes worth a damn, teams could shut down the Patriots pretty easily. I'll ask you again, how often do 240lb+ TEs in college turn into excellent WRs in the NFL?

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

No, being able to do many things is meaningless. Being able to do many things well is a good thing. BB and company are able to use Gronk and Hernandez as non-traditionals because they've got other players in playing traditional roles. If Branch and Welker couldn't catch passes worth a damn, teams could shut down the Patriots pretty easily. I'll ask you again, how often do 240lb+ TEs in college turn into excellent WRs in the NFL?

Deus - I don't see taking Fleener and "converting" him to WR. That being said, Fleener did not spend a lot of time lining up as a "traditional" TE either. He was in motion quite a bit and lined up as a WR, running many of the same routes that we expect of a WR. He ran INs, Outs, Hooks, Sluggos, Seam routes, comebacks, etc.

Now, with the questions that have come up on the O-line with Waters and Light potentially retiring, that would definitely push the need of the reserve TE down until the Pats made a decision on what they were going to do. But those retirements also free up Cap money which could also lead the Pats to bring in another Vet O-line or possibly help on the D-line and OLB. Then that would shift the need back to TE.

I do understand where Snake-eyes is coming from, though I don't agree that Fleener is the solution, though I did think him a possibility when there weren't questions about Light and Waters. It's all a matter of what the Pats do between now and the draft. Who they add. Who they lose. That will definitely play into what they do..

 

[VrabelJr]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

So, Brockers only did 19 reps in the bench press. Did it hurt his stock?

Three words: Range of Motion

 

[patfanken]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

Ken - it helps to read who I was replying to. Daigle was the one talking about talking an O-line in the first. That being said, you also seem to be over-looking some potential issues on the Pats O-line in that Light and Waters are both talking about potentially retiring. Add to that, the Pats do not have a bonifide center since Wendell really isn't the answer and McDonald is untested beyond the 2 games.

Now, going one step farther, there are PLENTY of good free agents at positions of need for the Patriots. There are a bunch at WR, Guard, Center, The D-line and OLB. The one position that there really isn't a lot is Safety. And there aren't a LOT of good safeties in the draft either.

Now, I understand that the Pats look at VALUE when they draft. They don't look solely at need. They don't look SOLELY at Best Player available. Now, if the Pats rate a Cordy Glenn a 7 or 8 while rating a Devon Still only a 6, the Pats are taking Glenn and there is nothing you nor anyone else can do about it.

So, while the Offense WAS the #3 offense in the league, there are plenty of question marks about it going forward that talking about an O-lineman in the 1st is not out of the realm of possibility.

1.DB, one unsubstantiated report, 2 days after losing a very tough game is being given much too much credibility. Most EVERY guy who have played 10+ years in the league give retirement some thought at the end of a long year. The Pats will know for certain before the draft about both Light and Waters. And while its a possibility that both retire, its extremely unlikely.

2.As to the C position. I thought Connolly did a great job this season. Now I'm not making the decision on Connolly and Koppen, but its inconceivable that at least one isn't resigned. And the more I've read about McDonald the more I like what I've heard.

3. I can't remember who said it, but it was a great point. There are about 5-7 blue chip prospects in the up coming draft. Then another 13-15 players rated slightly under that. Then when you get into the 20's, where the Pats have their picks the next 30-37 guys fall into the the same category. The talent at the bottom of the first round and the top half of the 2nd is roughly equal It is very unlikely that an offensive player from the 2nd group will fall that far or be rated THAT much higher than a defensive player who the Pats need

Though I agree with you that if it DOES happen, I think BB would take the player that is rated substantially higher regardless of position. But if the gap is marginal, I think he'll go with need. The emphasis here is on the words "THEIR board" because cruel experience has taught all Pats fans that BB's board is rarely what we expect.

Bottom line. I'd like to think that 4 of the first 5 picks will be on the defensive side of the ball.

BTW- Because this season season we "only" have 7 picks. I don't think we trade the 2nd #1 for a Future #1. I can easily see us making a few of small trades down to pick up some picks in the later rounds,

 

[Wilfork#75]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

So, Brockers only did 19 reps in the bench press. Did it hurt his stock?

I think 35" arms has a lot to do with that. However, its still a bit of a concern because its quite low for a big guy. I don't think its a reflection of his strength, but it could be a reflection of the time he put in, in the weight room. Still a top 10 pick though.

 

[Daigle]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

DeCastro and Cordy Glenn will both be gone by the time the Pats pick at 27. Konz is also likely to be gone at that point.

In all honesty, the Pats are going to go for BEST VALUE AVAILABLE like they always have. I don't foresee any issues like they had in 2006 because I believe that BB learned from that error.

Yeah you are probably right, but its a dam shame. Would like those guys on our team.

Also as you mention in other posts, we have some guys considering retirement. Waters isnt that young, Koppen neither and our running the fotball has decreased with Connelly so hes not the answer at C, no way. He is a good reserve but no starter.

 

[manxman2601]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

But means the comparisons to CJ are made by the uneducated. It;s not like Thomas is a great player anyway. He's only been good with Tebow and Denvers the triple option. Same offense he ran at GT.

He would suck here.

That's a bit harsh. It's true, coming late to the draft process and college football means there are some serious gaps in my knowledge, but "uneducated" is taking it a little far. I would say "in the process of educating myself" is more accurate.

 

[Wilfork#75]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

That's a bit harsh. It's true, coming late to the draft process and college football means there are some serious gaps in my knowledge, but "uneducated" is taking it a little far. I would say "in the process of educating myself" is more accurate.

Yeah, none of us are experts here and we are all still learning, so there is no need for people to attack others. This should be a community to share our opinions and learn more about the prospects. Instead some people can be very aggressive and confrontational when others don't agree with them (I'm not referring to you MHTK). If you have an opinion express it, but there is no need to get personal with anything, its only football.

 

[reflexblue]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

So, Brockers only did 19 reps in the bench press. Did it hurt his stock?

If your concerned about strength you shouldn't be, unlike Height strength can be Increased. I would never discount someone because of lack of strength Its something that can easily be improved.

 

[reflexblue]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

I think 35" arms has a lot to do with that. However, its still a bit of a concern because its quite low for a big guy. I don't think its a reflection of his strength, but it could be a reflection of the time he put in, in the weight room. Still a top 10 pick though.

Ahh, you know and understand the subtleties I'm not sure many people do.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

Three words: Range of Motion

It hurts his stock, people will think a big guy like him should do more.

Yes, long levers make it more difficult to lift the weight, but that's a different issue. If we really want to get into it we'd talk about why the bench press is an incredibly stupid way to try to measure strength, etc, but the perception is that Brokers should do more, and perception is reality.

It hurts his stock, perhaps not in a way meaningful enough to make him available to the Pats, but it's a red flag.

 

[manxman2601]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

It hurts his stock, people will think a big guy like him should do more.

Yes, long levers make it more difficult to lift the weight, but that's a different issue. If we really want to get into it we'd talk about why the bench press is an incredibly stupid way to try to measure strength, etc, but the perception is that Brokers should do more, and perception is reality.

It hurts his stock, perhaps not in a way meaningful enough to make him available to the Pats, but it's a red flag.

I saw this mentioned elsewhere but what might hurt his stock is his weights performance in confluence with the fact that he's regularly taken out on passing downs by LSU. Teams might have seen a number of reasons for that, now they might lock onto the fact that his lack of pass rush threat is down to a lack of strength. as Reflexblue points out, that's fixable, but is it something you want to risk a top 10 pick on. Anyway, Brockers is over-hyped and possibly over-rated, although a nice fit for a 3-4.

 

[Mark Morse]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

I hope that Brockers "lack of strength" drops him right into our laps!

 

[Wilfork#75]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

A pretty good group of DL in group 1 up now. Brockers, Coples, Branch, Chapman, Cox, Curry, Jones...

... Ingram, Hicks, Bequette, Crick. Really good group

 

[BritPat]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

Andre Branch runs an unofficial 4.62 on his first attempt. He weighed in at 6'4" 259lbs, with 34 inch arms.

 

[BritPat]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

Brockers is a big big kid.

 

[manxman2601]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

Really good speed from Andre Branch. 1.56 10 split.

 

[BritPat]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

Here goes Coples.....he looked quick.

 

[BritPat]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

Was quick - 4.75 for a 284lb guy.

 

[IllegalContact]

Re: * The 2012 Combine Drills!! *

so brockers is not only weak, but slow, too

I'll take fletcher cox