The Patriots will pick a RB in the first 2 rounds

[BobDigital]

No, the Pats didn't know it. Why? Because one only has to look back at 2002 when they didn't have a NT to see what that can mean.. Also, Ty Warren was only a 2nd year player.. He hadn't established himself yet.. You're making way too many assumptions about what the status of the team really was.

I stand corrected about Troy Brown.. However, you are wrong about Gaffney. Gaffney wasn't added until the October 9th, 2006. Well into the season. Doug Gabriel was added to the team via trade on Sept 2nd. And he didn't last the season. So this idea that the WRs was solid is just BS on your part..

So, now your changing your argument to fit reality.. That's called spinning.. The 2005 Defense was 17th in points allowed and 26 in yards allowed.

You pulling the 2006 Defense into the argument is non-sensical as it had no bearing on what the Pats did in the 2006 draft. The Pats drafted Maroney and Jackson because they needed a RB and a WR. Both were Josh McDaniels picks, though they were done with BB's support.

You said solid WRs. Not Solid Receivers. Gronk and Hernandez are TEs, not WRs. Here you are, again, changing your argument because what you stated originally was flawed and your doing a poor job trying to make up for it.

Yes, you did overlook it and trying to say otherwise is a lie and everyone here knows it. If you hadn't overlooked it, you'd have mentioned it in your OP. Something you didn't do and you said as much when reflexblue pointed out the issue.

Here is yet another flawed statement on your part. There is no "usual" for the Patriots when it comes to adding a RB. They spend the capital they have available at the time based on how they perceive their need. The times when the need was the highest, they spent high capital. When it's been lowest, they've not spent as much.

As for standing by what you said, that doesn't make you correct. It makes you stubborn and ignorant. Particularly when the facts contradict you.

It didn't clarify anything. All it did was show that you are grasping at straws because you aren't willing to admit that your entire premise was wrong. Dillon's cap number may have only been 2.15 for 2005 and 2.6 for 2006, but the Pats paid him close to $10M for those 2 years as part of the contract he'd signed. As for Kevin Faulk, his 2009 cap hit was $4.29M. And that was for a 3rd down back that was seeing 400-500 snaps a year.

Unfortunately for you, your OP and comments prior to this reply contradict you.

You have no overall point. You've already shown that. And no, I didn't leave out any details. What you did was make assumptions and try to show how smart you are based on those assumptions. Do yourself a favor and read Patriots Reign as well as Management Secrets of the New England Patriots Vol 1 and 2.

Okay you are clearly going out of your way to be very rude and also called me a liar. You are also claiming to know my state of mind which is highly arrogant of you. If you wanted to have a conversation about why I felt this is how BB operates we could have done that. That is what I had hoped we could have done. However you have made it clear all you are interested in being a jerk and stroking your ego. I don't do that and don't facilitate those who do. So conversation over and i would appreciate it if in the future you make the effort to not to reply to any of my future post.

 

[DaBruinz]

Bruinz, first off I would appreciate it if you address my future post with a bit less of a condescending tone. I think going on here to converse is fine but when you say things like "What you don't seem to understand or comprehend" it comes off badly. Thanks in advance.

If I wanted to be condescending to you, I would have called you a complete and utter moron who should stop posting because it kills everyone else's brain cells when we have to read such stupidity. I did no such thing. So, please, do everyone a favor and stop trying to place blame on others for the fact that it is your own posts that show a lack of understanding. That is not condescension. That is reality.

Now let me move on to your points.

I do not believe BB thought the run would work. Never said that. I only said the run was a big issue in that game and obviously if it would have worked more that would have been very welcome. No surprise there.

That's not what you said.

BB was not shy about getting away from it once he saw to his-not-so-surprise was it was not working. However he did want to give it a chance to see how it went which is interesting. He did not simply just pass every down from the start and only did that once the run game proved ineffective in reality. If he never had the intention to run at all using any runs plays would be a waste. Obviously he intended to try and see if it had a shot.

Reality says otherwise. You can have your opinion, but it's just not supported by fact. You can sit

Also yes the lack of the run game was clearly on the OL. They got no push and were often blown up. When did i claim otherwise about that game? You could have had Barry Sanders or Jim Brown back there and it would not have mattered.

Except that you implied it was the RBs in your response to Kenny B.

About your last point i disagree but only cause of the way you stated it though i think your overall point is generally true. Good OL and average running back is better than an average OL and good RB. Sure I agree 100%. I think the phase "a good RB almost never makes the O-line look better than they are" is an overstatement. Probably just got carried away trying to make your greater point I assume?

So, either you can't read or you purposely misquoted me despite the words being right there.

I said "A good O-line will always make a RB look better than he is.. A good RB almost never makes the O-line look better than they are.."

See the word in bold. That was there in my original post and you even quoted it.

You seem to think I don't want to improve at Guard or I think the OL is fine as is. Not at all the case I assure you. I want the OL to be better. It is pretty good at pass protection but leaves a lot to be desired in run blocking. I don't think a better RB will cure all it's ills. In fact I would probably prefer to take a Guard over a RB depending on the guard that falls.

I go by what you post. Here is what YOU posted to Kennyb:

"

Now you can upgrade that with Guards of course but to be honest looking at the Pats RBs they just were not all that good at running.

Sure tells me that you downplay the O-line's ability in the run game.

"

I I think BB can and will upgrade both. I just think he probably addresses RB high. Maybe he will address both high. Maybe it he goes first round guard 2nd round rb or 1st round RB 2nd round guard. That would not surprise me in the least.

However I think he is more likely to go high RB than G overall due to pass history. He has taken more RBs than Gs in the higher rounds IIRC. I think Mankins is the only high guard he has taken.

Let me tell you something about history.
In 2004, Belichick had only taken 1 underclassman in his drafts.. That was Patrick Pass. He drafted Vince Wilfork, who was an underclassman. Since then, Belichick has drafted many underclassmen.
In 2005, Belichick had never taken an OT in the 1st round. He took Logan Mankins and made Mankins a guard.
In 2006, Belichick had never drafted a RB in the 1st round. He took Maroney.
In 2006, Belichick had never spent the top 2 picks on offense.. He took Maroney and Chad Jackson.
In 2007, Belichick used a 1st round pick on a safety. That was the first DB he'd used a 1st round pick on.
In 2008, Belichick drafted Jerod Mayo in the 1st round (Top 6). That was another 1st as Belichick had never drafted a LB above the 3rd round prior to that.
In 2011, Belichick made another first for him. He drafted Nate Solder in the 1st round at the 16th pick.

So, you can sit here and quote history to people all you want, because, with Belichick, it doesn't matter. He is always changing. Always adapting.

 

[DaBruinz]

Okay you are clearly going out of your way to be very rude and also called me a liar. You are also claiming to know my state of mind which is highly arrogant of you. If you wanted to have a conversation about why I felt this is how BB operates we could have done that. That is what I had hoped we could have done. However you have made it clear all you are interested in being a jerk and stroking your ego. I don't do that and don't facilitate those who do. So conversation over and i would appreciate it if in the future you make the effort to not to reply to any of my future post.

I called you a liar because you lied. Plain and simple. I showed where you lied. You don't like it, maybe you should watch what you say.

I never claimed to know your state of mind. I made statements based on what you posted. Again, plain and simple.

The only person attempting to stroke their own ego is you. You are the one who was shown to be wrong and instead of just admitting to it, you've attempted to spin what you've said so you would look smart.

What I have made clear is that I'll take people to task who blatantly lie and think that others aren't smart enough to notice it.

If you don't want to be called out, then when people give you actual facts don't sit there and try and spin what you've said. It's that simple. Your other option is not to post.

EDIT: Before you start telling others not to judge you, shouldn't you do the same yourself?

 

[BobDigital]

EDIT: Before you start telling others not to judge you, shouldn't you do the same yourself?

Okay, this i will respond to. You are allowed to judge me. Go ahead and think anything you want. However going out of your way to be outwardly rude like you did was not called for and highly inappropriate.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...d/threads/draft-board-civility-policy.739115/

You clearly were not following these guidelines. I am not going to send a message to a mod but I would ask you to re-examine how you could have responded differently and I will do the same. I did not need to go out of my way to take a swing back and you and probably should just not have responded. Also I am sorry to hear about your recently loss of a friend btw.

 

[DaBruinz]

Okay, this i will respond to. You are allowed to judge me. Go ahead and think anything you want. However going out of your way to be outwardly rude like you did was not called for and highly inappropriate.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...d/threads/draft-board-civility-policy.739115/

You clearly were not following these guidelines. I am not going to send a message to a mod but I would ask you to re-examine how you could have responded differently and I will do the same. I did not need to go out of my way to take a swing back and you and probably should just not have responded. Also I am sorry to hear about your recently loss of a friend btw.

The problem with you is that I did not go out of my way to be outwardly rude to you. In fact, you were given exactly what you deserved. You outright lied and attempted to spin your way out of your failed arguments.

Your claims that I didn't follow the guidelines are as empty as your OP was legitimate.

 

[BobDigital]

If anyone else has any questions about my stance feel free to ask or just drop a comment with your opinion : )

 

[luuked]

So, you can sit here and quote history to people all you want, because, with Belichick, it doesn't matter. He is always changing. Always adapting.

I applaud you two for actually caring enough about your individual opinions to go at length here but I think what you said about BB pretty much hits the nail on its head.

We will go for whatever the staff will consider value/right for the team. Nothing else matters.

 

[Ivan]

It's starting to look like there is going to be a very good free agent market for released running backs. D. Williams and F. Gore for starters. We'll see how Belichick approaches it?

 

[manxman2601]

On Rob Rang's latest big board he has Melvin Gordon at 31 and Todd Gurley at 32. I should probably watch some Gordon just in case.

 

[Oswlek]

On Rob Rang's latest big board he has Melvin Gordon at 31 and Todd Gurley at 32. I should probably watch some Gordon just in case.

If this is so, then the time when RBs are so devalued that they become Bill's pet arbitrage opportunity may be upon us.

The problem with expecting the team to draft a RB high is that, even if Shane and Rids leave, NE still has Blount, Gray and White with some wildcards as well. It's reasonably well stocked for possibly losing the top two options. That just isn't where NE typically goes with their first pick. I could easily see them going RB with one of the thirds, though. Barring Gaffney being a hidden stud, I fully expect them to because Bill hasn't gone into a single season since 2006 with only one receiving back on the roster. There's no way he's hitting camp in September with White and nothing else.

 

[Deus Irae]

If this is so, then the time when RBs are so devalued that they become Bill's pet arbitrage opportunity may be upon us.

The problem with expecting the team to draft a RB high is that, even if Shane and Rids leave, NE still has Blount, Gray and White with some wildcards as well. It's reasonably well stocked for possibly losing the top two options. That just isn't where NE typically goes with their first pick. I could easily see them going RB with one of the thirds, though. Barring Gaffney being a hidden stud, I fully expect them to because Bill hasn't gone into a single season since 2006 with only one receiving back on the roster. There's no way he's hitting camp in September with White and nothing else.

Given the state of the current 'projected' roster, given that there's not a TE worth the value, and given that BB cracked the seal of "possible redshirt season, but what potential!" last year with Easley, don't they pretty much have to go with Gurley if he's there?*


*Note: Taking Gurley would throw off my hoped for top 4 position picks, so I'm not pimping it up to the world. I'm just looking at the logic of it all.

 

[scott99]

I think Gordon goes higher than 31 or 32. I'd love to get a road grading guard or tackle at 32 and RB Tevin Coleman at 64. Coleman is a good sized back with great vision, good speed, good pass receiver, he reminds me of Eric ****erson the way he runs.

 

[DaBruinz]

If Gurley is there at 32, then I'd expect BB to be trading down because he gets a good offer.. Someone will over-pay for Gurley..

 

[luuked]

If Gurley is there at 32, then I'd expect BB to be trading down because he gets a good offer.. Someone will over-pay for Gurley..

Overpay relative to the value that we have attached to Gurley / whoever else is still on the board at that time?

I am sure there will be offers but I am less confident that there will be many offers with value (e.g. Vikings picks two years back).

 

[manxman2601]

Given the state of the current 'projected' roster, given that there's not a TE worth the value, and given that BB cracked the seal of "possible redshirt season, but what potential!" last year with Easley, don't they pretty much have to go with Gurley if he's there?*


*Note: Taking Gurley would throw off my hoped for top 4 position picks, so I'm not pimping it up to the world. I'm just looking at the logic of it all.

Don't want to keep making this comparison but I'll do it once more - I see drafting Gurley very much like drafting Gronk as he's projected to be one of the very best in the NFL at his position but who falls because of injury. So yes, I think there's an excellent chance he drafts Gurley. On the other hand, three things suggest not. Firstly, BB might see better value in the RBBC approach and spending a first for someone to be part of that doesn't speak "value". Secondly, the depth of this draft and FA at RB is amazing. For example, Mike Davis from S Carolina is no Todd Gurley but he's still a good RB that can probably be had in the third. He could trade back if Gurley is on the board, pick up someone like Jake Fisher in the mid second and with a third rounder gained in the trade get Mike Davis as effectively a free RB. Thirdly, the receiving RB is the bigger need and BBmight prefer an Abdullah, Duke Johnson or David Johnson.

But when all is said and done, adding Gurley to this offense will be like adding Marshawn Lynch and I, and I'm sure BB can see the value in that.

 

[Deus Irae]

Don't want to keep making this comparison but I'll do it once more - I see drafting Gurley very much like drafting Gronk as he's projected to be one of the very best in the NFL at his position but who falls because of injury. So yes, I think there's an excellent chance he drafts Gurley. On the other hand, three things suggest not. Firstly, BB might see better value in the RBBC approach and spending a first for someone to be part of that doesn't speak "value". Secondly, the depth of this draft and FA at RB is amazing. For example, Mike Davis from S Carolina is no Todd Gurley but he's still a good RB that can probably be had in the third. He could trade back if Gurley is on the board, pick up someone like Jake Fisher in the mid second and with a third rounder gained in the trade get Mike Davis as effectively a free RB. Thirdly, the receiving RB is the bigger need and BBmight prefer an Abdullah, Duke Johnson or David Johnson.

But when all is said and done, adding Gurley to this offense will be like adding Marshawn Lynch and I, and I'm sure BB can see the value in that.

Since I'm battling the insomnia tonight, I'm still up. So...

I think the comparison would be more to Easley.

First round pick
ACL injury
Likely to be 'disappointing' in year one, due to ACL recovery process
Coming into a position where there is enough projected depth that he can be brought along slowly, or even red-shirted, and he's not a 'need' player

In short, he checks off the same boxes that made me not like the Easley pick last year for last season, even though I could see the sense in it for the long term. For me, the difference is that they're coming off of a Super Bowl win, rather than a disheartening loss to the Denver Mannings. As a result, while I certainly want the team to try winning the SB again, I'm no longer as adamant about the need to "Get Tom another ring", since he just got #4.*






*Part of it is also that I realize just how ridiculously lucky the team was last year, and I don't expect a repeat of that sort of luck this year, so I'm feeling very mellow about a possible drop off.

 

[BobDigital]

Since I'm battling the insomnia tonight, I'm still up. So...

I think the comparison would be more to Easley.

First round pick
ACL injury
Likely to be 'disappointing' in year one, due to ACL recovery process
Coming into a position where there is enough projected depth that he can be brought along slowly, or even red-shirted, and he's not a 'need' player

In short, he checks off the same boxes that made me not like the Easley pick last year for last season, even though I could see the sense in it for the long term. For me, the difference is that they're coming off of a Super Bowl win, rather than a disheartening loss to the Denver Mannings. As a result, while I certainly want the team to try winning the SB again, I'm no longer as adamant about the need to "Get Tom another ring", since he just got #4.*

*Part of it is also that I realize just how ridiculously lucky the team was last year, and I don't expect a repeat of that sort of luck this year, so I'm feeling very mellow about a possible drop off.

I agree with a lot of this. Gurley is not one of my top choices at 32 though he is on my board for that pick. I think Easley was a different situation. Gurley from my understanding does not have as severe an injury history as Easley so the hope he can contribute something this coming year particularly in the 2nd half is higher. I think that is important as if we want to win this year I am thinking we will need more impact from our rookie class as FA is going to weaken our team overall.

 

[patchick]

David Johnson is the player I find myself circling back to more and more. Hard to even call him an RB -- possibly closer to Hernandez than Vereen -- but as a total skill package I think he'd be a perfect addition to this offense.

 

[mayoclinic]

David Johnson is the player I find myself circling back to more and more. Hard to even call him an RB -- possibly closer to Hernandez than Vereen -- but as a total skill package I think he'd be a perfect addition to this offense.

I agree. I called him a cross between Vereen and Hernandez. Manx has been all over him, and (as usual) ahead of me.

Right now his post-combine draft stock seems to be soaring. CBS Sports has him ranked 66 at the moment, just behind Tevin Coleman (61). I'd definitely be interested with our late 3rd round pick or projected comp pick, but if it takes a 2nd, it would be a much harder call.

 

[patchick]

I agree. I called him a cross between Vereen and Hernandez. Manx has been all over him, and (as usual) ahead of me.

Right now his post-combine draft stock seems to be soaring. CBS Sports has him ranked 66 at the moment, just behind Tevin Coleman (61). I'd definitely be interested with our late 3rd round pick or projected comp pick, but if it takes a 2nd, it would be a much harder call.

Hard call indeed. As much as it looks like a lines-first draft, Vereen MUST be replaced and Johnson is the kind of versatile skill player that Josh & co. could have a field day with. I could picture him making a significant impact.