The Hurricane's First Round Mock

[PatsandTrojans55]

All good points; I personally have no horse in the race, I've said repeatedly, I have no idea what they are going to do on Draft Day - they always surprise me and always catch me unaware. You may be misinterpreting my comments on the "Why draft Long" thread as hope that we pick him, or interest in picking him, but honestly, I don't think he represents #7 value either (I've said a few times already, to me, for the Pats, I don't think there IS a #7 value guy available to us at #7 which is why I've hoped we trade down for a very long time). With that said, I could go into responses to your responses but that doesn't help anything or prove either of us right or wrong, I'm still speculating, and you could be rooting, hoping, or distracting for any number of deliberate or unintended reasons. From what I've read, I've yet to see any "real" scoops from what you've posted (not a knock, like Pony said above, I do enjoy reading your posts immensely, and with a few exceptions, I'm generally right there with you on your 'take' on the team from many angles, this just happens to be one where I a. don't agree with you and b. think it would definitely be in BB/Pioli's best interest to create a lot of hype surrounding Ellis at #7 to afford us a good trade down opportunity, which could certainly explain all your previous "rightness" and the possibility of there still being misdirection in this case...heck, I would, it would totally be worth it imo to get a lot of teams thinking we love Ellis via the "viral" route since they are often closed lipped to the media). Ultimately I'll be curious to see how Saturday an Sunday pan out, and if they take Ellis, I'll assume it's for a good reason and I'll be the first to give credit where credit is/was due for breaking the news (fingers crossed regardless) but my gut still tells me Ellis is not our guy for a variety of reasons - your zeal is only one of them.

Zeke,
Part 2

My question to you is who are they "smokescreening" with Sedrick Ellis? The Jets are looking to trade down as a viable option anyway. The Ravens don't need Ellis. The logical choice is Cincinnati, but why?

If they are smokescreening it would be the Jets and Ellis is not the choice to smokescreen with because they would need Ellis after trading Robertson away and it would defeat the purpose of the screen. More logical smokescreen players would be McFadden, Gholston or Long (which ever one you don't want) so they panic and pick the screen and your guy falls in your lap.

The point is Ellis is high on the Patriots board and my source along with other well-respected Patriots insiders couldn't ALL be wrong.

By the way, even if Gholston and Ellis are on the board don't be surprised if they trade down anyway if they deem the value is deemed high. Remember, They feel they have "ALOT of flexablility" here and are not filling what they deem as "pressing needs".

Again,
Thanks for your reply and I enjoy your conversation and I'm not trying to change the way you feel here just giving you somethings to consider a thought on.

PT55

 

[mike100915]

PatsTrojan55,

Please tell me they really aren't considering Albert's at #7. It just doesn't make awhole lot of sense. It's not a safe pick, making him a RT. Also, he'd be the highest paid OL, and that for a rookie RT is too much. It's not good value for them. Also, looks like Chris Long will be long gone come #7 now. Are they serious about Keith Rivers at 7?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I understand your thoughts but do me a favor and name one player in the Top 8 other than Jake Long that you can say will be a 8 time Pro Bowl caliber player? If you are honest with yourself you can't find one. After Jake there's a couple safe bets and a bunch of crap shoots.

By the way Mike Reiss agrees with my premise. In his newest mailbag.(I wonder who he talked to).

What do you think the Pats will do with their 7th overall pick? Trade it or keep it? Who might they draft?
Tom, East Greenville, Pa.

A: Tom, based on the opinion of people I talk to - and I say that because they know these players a lot better than I do - this is not a very good spot for the Patriots. Naturally, a lot will depend on the six players drafted before the No. 7 pick and I'm sure there are a few scenarios that the Patriots would be OK with. Yet my sense is that they will be working hard to trade down. The reason it is not a great spot is that the money that the No. 7 pick will command (around $18 million in guarantees/bonuses) should yield a top-caliber player, at a key position, with little risk/questions. After all, this player will be the third or fourth highest paid player on the club, receiving a contract similar to Adalius Thomas. I see USC defensive lineman Sedrick Ellis and Virginia offensive lineman Branden Albert as the safest choices, so if the Patriots keep the pick, I'd start my list off with them. Ohio State defensive end Vernon Gholston would also be on the list.

Remember this is about value.
PT55

I seem to be the only one who actually gets that...

So you know a scout or an agent or perhaps you are one. Maybe Mike is reading your stuff here or talking to the same source. When it comes to these kinds of insights, or interpretation of insight, Mike is wrong as often as not. Great reporter though. Certainly the money is a concern (and I think I get that moreso than a lot of folks) and I don't doubt they would prefer to trade down, but if they can't they need to make sure they spend that money wisely on a couple of levels.

Albert has a better shot at 8 Pro Bowls if he's a starting OL here for several years than Ellis or Gholston because they don't really have a starting position here unless a pretty elite talent gets winded, gets hurt, gets cut or traded, or drops dead. And one of those guys already has a pretty good and well paid backup they acquired on day 2.

Three guys who know the business pretty good, two of whom also know BB personally, say Albert is the guy for a myriad of reasons I've already covered ad nauseum including justification of that contract within the locker room. He's risen into the top ten on most boards surpassing Clady. They project him as either a Guard or Tackle including even a potential LT. They watched 42 and they know what's coming as does Bill - not everyone can muster it but those who are determined to have their blueprint to rattle Brady - run over his OL and collapse his pocket.


One of the topics on this board lately is where is Brady. He's recovering from getting the ever lovin' snot cumulatively beat out of him. He's tough to sack but he's been getting hit hard and pressured to much for too long. In February the Giants found the key to pressuring him to the point he couldn't counter it. Are there times he can make a sandwich back there - yup, and those are the plays that generally make the highlight reels. For every snap like that there are two where he hits the deck. Ankle, shoulder, hernia - I don't want to have to live though knee or something else he can't play through. Do you?

I'm all for finding the long awaited LB conversion candidates talented enough to make it on this roster as starters. The top of the first is just too far to reach for that player. Bill has and will find those in veteran FA as well as he may in the draft. OL in FA? Those only come in via the draft. If he can trade down and still get an upgrade on OL and position himself to get one of the second tier corners while addressing OLB and maybe ILB I'm down with that too. It's just at #7 I think he needs to draft a player who projects as an immediate starter BECAUSE of the $$$$. BPA has no value there if he can't. This is an odd draft - deeper than top heavy. There was not a clear concensus #1, more like several almost interchangeable #5's.

BTW Tuna apparently never looked seriously at any of the 4 available DL for the same reason we shouldn't. They aren't a great fit for a 3-4 meaning most of them would be conversion projects. He floated their names to leverage a contract. Drafting at this level you have to take the safe pick as Tuna did. Albert immediately starts and upgrades the OL as well as it's depth whether he plays guard or tackle. The guys he replaces one of are an already 29 year old 5th rounder and an oft injured UDFA wrestler who tested FA and found no other takers. Neither is expensive (to keep or cut) and either could remain as a highly functional upgraded backup.

 

[PatsandTrojans55]

PatsTrojan55,

Please tell me they really aren't considering Albert's at #7. It just doesn't make awhole lot of sense. It's not a safe pick, making him a RT. Also, he'd be the highest paid OL, and that for a rookie RT is too much. It's not good value for them. Also, looks like Chris Long will be long gone come #7 now. Are they serious about Keith Rivers at 7?

He is considered a safe pick by most. The way Mike Reiss would phrase the question is why he got the answer of "He would be a safe pick". He is a safe pick in terms of if your going to spend this amount of money on a position then O-Line is always a safer bet in general. He might not be glamorous but will be affective.

Based on the feeling I'm getting is that they are going to get what they deem is the best value at #7 if they are forced to stay there. And Albert's has good value there as well as Gholston and Ellis.

Are they serious about Rivers? Yes
Are they serious about Rivers at #7? No

Chris Long, I would say has a 60-40% chance of being there at #7. If the Raiders pass on him it goes up. Oh wait, KC has a void at DE now so yes. He is less likely to get passed both Oakland and KC.

PT55

 

[mike100915]

He is considered a safe pick by most. The way Mike Reiss would phrase the question is why he got the answer of "He would be a safe pick". He is a safe pick in terms of if your going to spend this amount of money on a position then O-Line is always a safer bet in general. He might not be glamorous but will be affective.

Based on the feeling I'm getting is that they are going to get what they deem is the best value at #7 if they are forced to stay there. And Albert's has good value there as well as Gholston and Ellis.

Are they serious about Rivers? Yes
Are they serious about Rivers at #7? No

Chris Long, I would say has a 60-40% chance of being there at #7. If the Raiders pass on him it goes up. Oh wait, KC has a void at DE now so yes. He is less likely to get passed both Oakland and KC.

PT55

I don't think Albert's is good value at #7. For one he didn't play tackle in College, and making that transition your rookie year in the NFL isn't easy. Also, he'd be your highest paid OL and he could quite possibly sit the bench for the first year, and if does play that's alot to pay an RT. Michael Holley on WEEI seemed to think that Albert's is over-rated and wouldn't be taken at #7. I could even see them taking McFadden if he is there at 7, I don't think that either Gholston or Long will be there, and I guess it's possible the Jets could take Ellis, even though my guess is they love McFadden. Albert's will not be the choice at 7, I don't think Rivers would either, I wouldn't be shocked to see them take Derrick Harvey, but I feel that is very unlikely. My best guess is that it will be Sedrick Ellis, or the person who falls if KC takes an OL.

 

[PonyExpress]

I seem to be the only one who actually gets that...

So you know a scout or an agent or perhaps you are one. Maybe Mike is reading your stuff here or talking to the same source. When it comes to these kinds of insights, or interpretation of insight, Mike is wrong as often as not. Great reporter though. Certainly the money is a concern (and I think I get that moreso than a lot of folks) and I don't doubt they would prefer to trade down, but if they can't they need to make sure they spend that money wisely on a couple of levels.

Albert has a better shot at 8 Pro Bowls if he's a starting OL here for several years than Ellis or Gholston because they don't really have a starting position here unless a pretty elite talent gets winded, gets hurt, gets cut or traded, or drops dead. And one of those guys already has a pretty good and well paid backup they acquired on day 2.

Three guys who know the business pretty good, two of whom also know BB personally, say Albert is the guy for a myriad of reasons I've already covered ad nauseum including justification of that contract within the locker room. He's risen into the top ten on most boards surpassing Clady. They project him as either a Guard or Tackle including even a potential LT. They watched 42 and they know what's coming as does Bill - not everyone can muster it but those who are determined to have their blueprint to rattle Brady - run over his OL and collapse his pocket.


One of the topics on this board lately is where is Brady. He's recovering from getting the ever lovin' snot cumulatively beat out of him. He's tough to sack but he's been getting hit hard and pressured to much for too long. In February the Giants found the key to pressuring him to the point he couldn't counter it. Are there times he can make a sandwich back there - yup, and those are the plays that generally make the highlight reels. For every snap like that there are two where he hits the deck. Ankle, shoulder, hernia - I don't want to have to live though knee or something else he can't play through. Do you?

I'm all for finding the long awaited LB conversion candidates talented enough to make it on this roster as starters. The top of the first is just too far to reach for that player. Bill has and will find those in veteran FA as well as he may in the draft. OL in FA? Those only come in via the draft. If he can trade down and still get an upgrade on OL and position himself to get one of the second tier corners while addressing OLB and maybe ILB I'm down with that too. It's just at #7 I think he needs to draft a player who projects as an immediate starter BECAUSE of the $$$$. BPA has no value there if he can't. This is an odd draft - deeper than top heavy. There was not a clear concensus #1, more like several almost interchangeable #5's.

BTW Tuna apparently never looked seriously at any of the 4 available DL for the same reason we shouldn't. They aren't a great fit for a 3-4 meaning most of them would be conversion projects. He floated their names to leverage a contract. Drafting at this level you have to take the safe pick as Tuna did. Albert immediately starts and upgrades the OL as well as it's depth whether he plays guard or tackle. The guys he replaces one of are an already 29 year old 5th rounder and an oft injured UDFA wrestler who tested FA and found no other takers. Neither is expensive (to keep or cut) and either could remain as a highly functional upgraded backup.

Did you read ex-Pat Ross Tucker's SI article about the value of O-line positions? I don't see how drafting a right guard at #7 can be considered anything other than folly. When Mankins comes up for contract negotiations after this season, will he be signed? Is it responsible to have 2 guards making that kind of coin, plus another LT? Or is Albert projected to play LT? And isn't that conversion project, making a college guard into an NFL LT, just as risky, or more so, than making a college DE an NFL 3-4 OLB?

If the issue is Brady's health, which I agree is the most important issue facing this team every season, the only feasible OL pick at #7 is a projected LT. Projecting Albert as that player, based on 2 games of college experience, seems extremely optimistic.

If the player were Clady, I could embrace the idea. At least he's a legitimate LT prospect.

As far as money to a rookie causing dissension in the lockerroom...The Pats need to take the player who will help this team win the most games over the next 6 seasons, not the one who will make the locker room more comfortable for a few veterans next season.

As far as Ellis, I completely agree with you. A good rule for the draft is to avoid any player Pete Carroll has come within 10 feet of. You may miss a talent now and then, but there's a 90% chance you'll avoid a bust.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I don't think Albert's is good value at #7. For one he didn't play tackle in College, and making that transition your rookie year in the NFL isn't easy. Also, he'd be your highest paid OL and he could quite possibly sit the bench for the first year, and if does play that's alot to pay an RT. Michael Holley on WEEI seemed to think that Albert's is over-rated and wouldn't be taken at #7. I could even see them taking McFadden if he is there at 7, I don't think that either Gholston or Long will be there, and I guess it's possible the Jets could take Ellis, even though my guess is they love McFadden. Albert's will not be the choice at 7, I don't think Rivers would either, I wouldn't be shocked to see them take Derrick Harvey, but I feel that is very unlikely. My best guess is that it will be Sedrick Ellis, or the person who falls if KC takes an OL.

For a top ten first round guard/RT (and some say LT prospect) to out earn anyone on this OL is not a stretch. I know 3 of them went to the pro bowl LAST year, he would have too on this offense as their selections were as much based on guilt by association (to Brady and Moss and Welker...). Two of them are defacto second rounders, the C and RT came in the 5th, the RG is an UDFA. 3 of the 5 are on second deals in which they took a substantial home town discount because I think they know how lucky they are to have landed here...when Neal was a FA recently he had NO TAKERS.

Now turn your attention to the DL and if we must OLB...where any player we select will be a backup or conversion project to some pretty elite players. On a contract that will make him the 3rd or 4th highest paid player on the team (depending on how you look at it - guaranteed money or total contract value), in a situation where he has no position unless an incumbant is hurt or moved out of his natural position to accommodate the rookie or he's perhaps on the block... There could be a locker room backlash as a result emanating from guys who are looking at getting squeezed on their next deal because this kid got big money out the gate...

Nobody on that Oline has viable complaint. DL 4 or 5 guys can make a compelling case.

 

[dryheat44]

I think veterans throughout the league understand that a high draft pick is going to be among the highest-paid players on the team. That's just the way the system works - some of them, Richard Seymour for example, have been on that side in his career. I've never heard a report of a revolt in an NFL locker room because a highly-regarded rookie is making more money than some established veterans. I don't think it's going to happen in Foxboro.

 

[mike100915]

I'm not saying there would a revolt of any kind. I'm simply saying I don't want to pay a rookie RT, who never played RT all that money. I 'd rather spend that money on other players. I think Albert's at #7 is a reach, same thing for Ryan Clady as well. The only OL I'd take would have been Jake Long. Also, I think we have much greater needs on defense then on OL. It's also much easier to pickup a servicable RT then it would be to get a OLB in a 3-4, or a DT with the ability of Sedrick Ellis.

 

[makoute]

I'm not saying there would a revolt of any kind. I'm simply saying I don't want to pay a rookie RT, who never played RT all that money. I 'd rather spend that money on other players. I think Albert's at #7 is a reach, same thing for Ryan Clady as well. The only OL I'd take would have been Jake Long. Also, I think we have much greater needs on defense then on OL. It's also much easier to pickup a servicable RT then it would be to get a OLB in a 3-4, or a DT with the ability of Sedrick Ellis.

I agree, it doesn't seem sensible that the pats or any other team would do that for a guard in college.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Did you read ex-Pat Ross Tucker's SI article about the value of O-line positions? I don't see how drafting a right guard at #7 can be considered anything other than folly. When Mankins comes up for contract negotiations after this season, will he be signed? Is it responsible to have 2 guards making that kind of coin, plus another LT? Or is Albert projected to play LT? And isn't that conversion project, making a college guard into an NFL LT, just as risky, or more so, than making a college DE an NFL 3-4 OLB?

If the issue is Brady's health, which I agree is the most important issue facing this team every season, the only feasible OL pick at #7 is a projected LT. Projecting Albert as that player, based on 2 games of college experience, seems extremely optimistic.

If the player were Clady, I could embrace the idea. At least he's a legitimate LT prospect.

As far as money to a rookie causing dissension in the lockerroom...The Pats need to take the player who will help this team win the most games over the next 6 seasons, not the one who will make the locker room more comfortable for a few veterans next season.

As far as Ellis, I completely agree with you. A good rule for the draft is to avoid any player Pete Carroll has come within 10 feet of. You may miss a talent now and then, but there's a 90% chance you'll avoid a bust.

I read Tuckers article and unless we read different versions I think it totally validates this move. I think you need to read it again.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/ross_tucker/04/02/oline.rankings/index.html

He was hard pressed to justify the value differential currently perceived between a LT and RT because of the help (sliding protection) that LT's generally get, but because they do man the blindside he gave them the nod. RT, RG, LG and C are the order in which he values the rest. If the RT or RG can't stand alone when you side help left they tie up your TE and/or RB - which has so consistently been the case here it has cost us in lost time and lost yardage opportunities.

I also read unoriginals thread as well as watching the game and realize that it was consistent pressure up the middle collapsing the pocket which meant Brady couldn't evade pressure with nowhere to go that cost us a SB (and not the defense or OC's play calling or failure to adjust protections to a pass rush we had insufficient talent to withstand). The only way to truly counter that is to upgrade talent on the LOS. If there were a stud LT available I'd replace Light, but even JLong is not a guarantee not to end up at RT (although he will be given every opportunity to prove he can be a LT) and yet Tuna saw him as the safe pick because he will be one or the other (as opposed to a 3-4 conversion project). But then I'd still want to upgrade that right side. Light is functional when we slide him help as needed. When we do so, the RT ad RG are either left to their own devices or require constant help from the TE's and RB's which is the case here and what lands them on the injury report regularly and severely limits their ability to be available as receiving options. Clady's stock has dropped substantially and I don't presume he'd actually be an upgrade at LT anyway.

We need to be able to pass and run block at a higher level consistently without routinely being forced to use (up) our TE's and RB's as blockers. I would love to upgrade Light, but he only gets Brady killed infrequently - maddening as that is. He struggles at times against speed rushers, but we usually know early on when those are coming and where they are coming from and we can generally slide help to him and adjust against that sort of situation and eventually make teams pay. This was different, this was losing the battle inside man to man. Mankins may have (hopefully) had an uncharacteristic bad day. The bad day on the right wasn't all that uncharacteristic given Kaczur is what he is and Neal went out as he frequently does...which means you need a better plan than starting him with Hochstein on alert along side Kaczur. And Koppen's brain which is what we pay him for moreso than brawn is only as valuable as the weapons it can properly deploy. Brady is so valuable to this team because of what he can do with less that it would be a sin to waste the receiving weapons we have now finally surrounded him with because he can't get to them from his ass.

LOS is where games are won or lost. Our DL is elite. Our OL is not. I know the defense failed us in allowing 17 points but yeesh... short of them pitching a shutout it was the offense being almost unfathomably shut down not by some insanely exotic blitz packages but by brute force consistently applied pressure up the middle 4 on 5 or 5 on 6 that cost us any realistic shot at a 4th ring most folks honestly believed was a given BECAUSE of an historic offense.

Teams were taking their best shot at derailing that offense down the stretch. One finally put the puzzle together and caught up with us by attacking our only real weakness on offense from their only real defensive strength. We couldn't get to their no frills secondary, and that was what they banked on. Teams who percieve us as the only real impediment to their ultimate success will follow that path. Even if only one or two a year succeed at it, it could end up costing us any more rings in Brady's and Belichick's time.

A fully functional version of this offense that can't be thoroughly shut down by collapsing the pocket around Brady will also make it easier for Bill to retool the defense incrementally via the draft and FA while still winning championships. That's worth investing in, as is the interior or right side of the line. If it wasn't, Moss wouldn't have been resigned for $9M. He can routinely beat double teams and even triple teams, or at least free up Welker and Gaffney to beat single coverage, but if Brady can get his throws away cleanly or if he finally gets more than badly bruised mentally and physically, it ain't gonna matter. And Maroney will be a lot more successful and durable as well if he doesn't have to open his own holes in order to get to where his talents lie. And Faulk will remain an explosive weapon if he's not being over used as a kamikaze blocker. And maybe if we didn't screw their shoulders and/or psyche's up blocking all the time our TE's could stay on the field and start accumulating some serious and crucial yardage. Heck, maybe we could even start relegating our pass rushers to playing only on defense instead of using them as jumbo linemen - Richard for one would probably see the value in that ...

 

[The Hurricane]

I love how off topic this thread has gotten. I'll just settle this once and for all:

1. Branden Albert is currently one of the most overhyped players in the draft. I think if you want an LT Long and Clady are unquestionably ranked ahead of him. Chris Williams might be too. If you just need line help across the board THAT is where he is valuable because he is versatile. BUT you don't draft a versatile lineman that MIGHT be able to play LT in the top 10. It's just stupid. The demand for help at the other positions is much lower. He'll get drafted in the 10-20 range (probably on the higher end of that spectrum) if teams are smart. The Patriots are NOT seriously considering him.

2. Matt Ryan isn't lasting past the 3rd pick and Atlanta isn't going to trade out of it. This makes all talks of trading up for Ryan seem silly. Somebody would need a serious man-crush on Ryan to trade up to number 2 to take him since that would likely cost multiple first rounders and then some.

3. PatsTrojans55 clearly doesn't have any information that isn't already public knowledge. He's probably just a USC fan but I'm going to go out on a limb and say he actually IS Sedrick Ellis(It's funnier that way). Nice try buddy but you aren't helping your draft stock.

I'd say this is our draft board:
1a and 1b. Vernon Gholston and Chris Long. In alphabetical order since I sure have no idea which one we like more.
2.Glen Dorsey
3. Sedrick Ellis
4. Leodis McKelvin
5. Derek Harvey
5. Branden Albert
6. Keith Rivers
7. Aquib Talib
8. Antoine Cason
9. Quentin Groves (yeah I know I was very wrong about him earlier but w/e I learn from my mistakes)

I also think up through ellis are the only players we would seriously consider taking at number 7. MAYBE we would consider Harvey but i doubt it.

So don't get me wrong, if the other guys are missing and we can't trade down I think Ellis is a legit possibility but I think its a bit much to be hyping this guy as crazily as you are. He is our fallback plan, and he is probably our trade bait if we don't get the guys we really want.

 

[PonyExpress]

Mo,
I don't disagree with your premise at all that the O-line needs an upgrade athletically. I just disagree with the money paid to a #7 pick at RG. The Tucker article about salaries is here:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/ross_tucker/03/26/oline.salaries1/index.html
It makes more plain his views concerning the value of the OL positions, especially the interior positions.

I would much rather upgrade the interior with a player like Zuttah at #62 or later than Albert at #7, based on salary.

And I also believe that part of the failure of the pats in the last playoff lossess, apart from substandard offensive game planning and execution, was the lack of 4th Q pass rush. I understand that the Pats only gave up 17 points. But 14 were in the 4 Q to surrender leads and lose the game. In the Colt game in '06 it was the same thing. My take on the draft right now is...

1. Gholston/Long
2. Zuttah
3a. Cason/Ch.Jackson/Wheatley et. al.
3b. NT (Okam/R. Bryant)

If Gholston/Long are gone

1. Clady
2. Avril
3a. Cason/Ch Jackson/Wheatley et. al.
3b. NT (Okam/R Bryant)

 

[mike100915]

The Patriots OL is fine. They had 3 Pro Bowlers last year. There is no way they take Ryan Clady at 7, and there is no way they take Branden Alberts either. OL is one of the areas pn this team which we really don't have to worry about. They could use another RT, but they can get that in the later rounds of the draft or a veteran come this summer. What they need is help on defense. WE can rule out a DB with the 7th pic. That leaves the front 7. Michael Holley seems to think they love Dorsey and Ellis. Dorsey will be gone, Ellis more then likely will be there. Also, maybe Long or Gholston will be there (hopefully). Personally, I feel they'd take either which ever one of the Long or Gholston tandem is there, but the closer we get the draft the more unlikely I believe either one of them will be there. That leaves Ellis, and it would make sense to grab him. It would allow the D to do more things, and also would give them a replacement for Richard Seymour when he leaves in 2 years, because honestly they can't afford to keep him and Wilfork. Also, even though he as injured much of last year, Seymour wasn't that effective. The area of needs on this team is on defense and that is what they must address with probably their first 2 or 3 picks. They have to get younger and more athletic there. Their OL had one really bad game, that they still could of won, if their D made a stop. So, let's address depth on the OL later in the draft, and I am a believer with Ross Tucker here at there isn't that much seperation for OL. Hopefully, at the #7 pick we can land a Chris Long or Vernon Gholston, but I'd settle for a Sedrick Ellis too. It's much more of a concern.