To me: It's Willis

[PATSNUTme]

(in a gentle voice) You are wrong here. JK But that kind of trade up will be almost impossible. The top of the draft is thin. Maybe 10 with first round grades. Those ten dont want the trade down, imo. Also it may be hard to find a way to trade out of our picks into a heavy rd.2/3 presence. We are kind of stuck with the picks we have. And therein lies the challenge. Without a second rounder, and no one to trade with to get one, we cant let a marginal player slide. I see this draft as being the biggest challenge BB/SP have faced thusfar.

My position is to TRY to trade after the 15th pick. That way we can swap our 2 1st for Willis and a 2nd. If no one does wants to trade them we will pick at our regular position.

But, if there is a chance to get Willis and a mid second rounder, we should do it.

 

[PonyExpress]

Harris is good and I like him.He is considered to be a 2 down tackle to tackle guy. He is also a consensus 3rd rounder. Why not get both, we will need them going forward?

Willis is a 2 down run stuffer with great striking power, who has potential, in time, to develop his coverage skills. Harris is a complete LBer who is more natural in coverage and shows fluid change of direction skills in a small area. He does not hit with as much violence but gets the job done. Willis is more straight line. Both are solid prospects, but the difference between the two is not significant enough IMO to sacrifice an additional #1 pick to choose Willis.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Willis is a 2 down run stuffer with great striking power, who has potential, in time, to develop his coverage skills. Harris is a complete LBer who is more natural in coverage and shows fluid change of direction skills in a small area. He does not hit with as much violence but gets the job done. Willis is more straight line. Both are solid prospects, but the difference between the two is not significant enough IMO to sacrifice an additional #1 pick to choose Willis.

Better let Nolan Nawrocki of PFW and Russ Lande of GMjr know this. They have it backwards. Both have Harris rated 3rd round along with other top 100+ list.

 

[dryheat44]

I agree that there will be good Safeties to draft in the third round; should we want to do so. (Personally I'm not convinced there is room on the roster to waste a pick on a Safety, But to each his own)..

You like Willlis. So do I. But I don't think he is the best ILB in the draft, FOR THE PATRIOTS. Like a QB, what is between the ears as much or more important, given that he has acceptable athletic credentials. Harris' credentials are superb too.

David Harris is a smart sound judgment ILB, who can eventually call plays and set the Defense. Meanwhile he has the prototype size. His speed is very good too, but not quite the speed of Willis. He is downgraded a little because he isn't spectacular, but he doesn't get out of position. Sound tackling is just that, sound tackling. And that what Harris does.

I've never said this before, but yeah, what he said. I love Willis - Great player, and the best linebacker in the draft. I'm not convinced that he's going to be better than Harris, or even DeOssie, in the Belichick 3-4. He might me the second coming of Jonathan Vilma - another great player, but miscast as a 3-4 ILB.

 

[PonyExpress]

Better let Nolan Nawrocki of PFW and Russ Lande of GMjr know this. They have it backwards. Both have Harris rated 3rd round along with other top 100+ list.

Examples are numerous of LB prospects who were considered less then "1st rd caliber" by draft gurus but became excellent NFL players. The list I posted earlier illustrates that point. Logan Mankins was considered a "3rd rd prospect" by many in the days leading up to the 2005 draft, a notoriously weak class. If the draft were redone he would be a top 10 pick, at least.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Examples are numerous of LB prospects who were considered less then "1st rd caliber" by draft gurus but became excellent NFL players. The list I posted earlier illustrates that point. Logan Mankins was considered a "3rd rd prospect" by many in the days leading up to the 2005 draft, a notoriously weak class. If the draft were redone he would be a top 10 pick, at least.

Couldn't agree with you more. That is why I say if BB & Scott take a pass on him, I'm fine with it. Those guys should and do know 100X's more than we do and they still have misses.

 

[cstjohn17]

I've never said this before, but yeah, what he said. I love Willis - Great player, and the best linebacker in the draft. I'm not convinced that he's going to be better than Harris, or even DeOssie, in the Belichick 3-4. He might me the second coming of Jonathan Vilma - another great player, but miscast as a 3-4 ILB.

Vilma is very interesting, I am hearing some buzz from Reiss and others that the Patriots are considering someone like Jon Beason. He is basically a small, fast LB that is the exact opposite of our typical LB.

It made be wonder if BB has watched how Vilma performed in a very similar system in NY. Vilma was not protected (Waren, Wilfork, Seymour) the way our ILBs are. Maybe they saw Vilma being effective in the same way Edwards has been effective in SD and think the adding some speed (albeit undersized speed) can work in our scheme.

Me, I am old school. The 2006 Pats were averaging less than 80 yards and 14.6 PPG with a good 2 down run stuffer (Seau). I don't see this player on the roster and I don't see how adding a "quick" guy can help unless it is only on 3rd downs.

 

[PATSNUTme]

There is also Stuart Bradley in 3rd-4th who is projecting to go to ILB in 3-4. We should take more than one. Bradely would take a year to convert.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

A lot of people consider Beason a Mike LB. And although he's never played in a traditional 3-4 defense, the will LB position at Miami is actually responsible for 2 gaps in that defense. Of course all the reads are different and the bodies are in the wrong place. I guess from looking at film of the Miami games, BB must have a decent idea of how Beason could function as a mike in his defense.
And I know BB is a genius and all that, but I still can not figure out how a six foot 236 pound LB fits as a mike in his defense. All I can think is that BB alters the scheme based on the lack of a traditional mike.

 

[AzPatsFan]

The Patriots drafted Logan Mankins, in only his second year considered by Dr. Z of SI to be the best guard in the NFL, at #32. Every first rd player they have drafted has been an above average contributing starter. I have confidence in this organization's ability to draft quality in the 1st rd. Rather than my perspective reflecting a "defeatist attitude" as someone suggested, I would say it is a sign of confidence in this organization's excellent track record in rd 1. I would rather have two good players than one.

IMO Drafting in rd one is about limiting risk, going for the highest floor, not the highest ceiling, and not putting all your eggs in one basket when you have two baskets. There are multiple quality Lbers in every draft.

To illustrate this, here are a few of the Lbers available in each draft since 1996. Lbers drafted at #20 or later are highlighted (#20 is within reasonable reach of the Pats for a trade up). Players drafted to be 3-4 OLBs are not included.

1996
Ray Lewis
T. Bruschi
D. Edwards
Z Thomas

1997
P. Boulware
J. Farrior
Jamie Sharper
Dexter Coakley

1998
K. Brooking
T. Spikes
B. Simmons
L. Fletcher
S. Cowart
Shawn Barber

1999
C. Claiborne
Al Wilson
M. Peterson
R. Colvin
E. Barton

2000
Arrington
Urlacher
J. Peterson
K. Bullock
I. Gold
C. Haggans

2001
D. Morgan
K. Bell
E. Hartwell

2002
W. Witherspoon
Andra Davis
D. Thornton
N. Harris
L. Foote
Akin Ayodele

2003
N. Barnett
Kawika Mitchell
V. Hobson
Lance Briggs
Angelo Crowell
Bradie James
Cato June

2004
Vilma
DJ Williams
K. Dansby
Darryl Smith

2005
Derrick Johnson
K. Burnett
L. Tatupu
C. Crowder
K. Morrison
L. Hill

2006
Hawk
Sims
Carpenter
D. Ryans
DQ Jackson
C. Ingram

At #24 or #28 a quality Lber with starting potential will be available.

There are the following guys who DON'T FIT the Belichick 3-4 since he arrived and started drafting. (In Italics)


2000
Arrington
Urlacher
J. Peterson
K. Bullock
I. Gold
C. Haggans

2001
D. Morgan
K. Bell
E. Hartwell

2002
W. Witherspoon
Andra Davis
D. Thornton
N. Harris
L. Foote
Akin Ayodele

2003
N. Barnett
Kawika Mitchell
V. Hobson
Lance Briggs
Angelo Crowell
Bradie James
Cato June

2004
Vilma
DJ Williams
K. Dansby
Darryl Smith

2005
Derrick Johnson
K. Burnett
L. Tatupu
C. Crowder
K. Morrison
L. Hill

2006
Hawk
Sims
Carpenter
D. Ryans
DQ Jackson
C. Ingram

So that of all the candidates that fit the 3-4, we have only:

Bullock,
Hartwell,
Harris,
Ayodele,
Mitchell,
Crowell,
Burnett,
James,
Dansby,
Crowder.

Of these ten, five Bullock, Ayodele, Burnett, Dansby and Crowder are OLBs. Hartwell, Harris, Mitchell, Crowell, and James are the only ILB candidates. James is or was just marginally sized, Crowell has barely been good enough. BB has looked at Hartwell, and Mitchell and even James, leaving only Nap Harris as a candidate in which he has shown no interest.

This tends to confirm that the draft has been essentially barren of Patriots scheme ILBs.

But this is not true this year. There are FOUR candidates. Willis might be gone, but the other three should be there. Although I like Willis I'm not sure the best Patriots scheme ILB, won't turn out to be Harris or eventually DeOssie. Meanwhile Posluzny is a "safe" pick, who can play too.

As for the OLBs, Ayodele hasn't been great, and Crowder was carefully studied by the Pats, and they decided his knees would not make for a long career. Crowder has beaten the odds, so far. That leaves only three there too. Belichick has preferred bigger DEs to convert.

 

[PonyExpress]

There are the following guys who DON'T FIT the Belichick 3-4 since he arrived and started drafting. (In Italics)


2000
Arrington
Urlacher
J. Peterson
K. Bullock
I. Gold
C. Haggans

2001
D. Morgan
K. Bell
E. Hartwell

2002
W. Witherspoon
Andra Davis
D. Thornton
N. Harris
L. Foote
Akin Ayodele

2003
N. Barnett
Kawika Mitchell
V. Hobson
Lance Briggs
Angelo Crowell
Bradie James
Cato June

2004
Vilma
DJ Williams
K. Dansby
Darryl Smith

2005
Derrick Johnson
K. Burnett
L. Tatupu
C. Crowder
K. Morrison
L. Hill

2006
Hawk
Sims
Carpenter
D. Ryans
DQ Jackson
C. Ingram

So that of all the candidates that fit the 3-4, we have only:

Bullock,
Hartwell,
Harris,
Ayodele,
Mitchell,
Crowell,
Burnett,
James,
Dansby,
Crowder.

Of these ten, five Bullock, Ayodele, Burnett, Dansby and Crowder are OLBs. Hartwell, Harris, Mitchell, Crowell, and James are the only ILB candidates. James is or was just marginally sized, Crowell has barely been good enough. BB has looked at Hartwell, and Mitchell and even James, leaving only Nap Harris as a candidate in which he has shown no interest.

This tends to confirm that the draft has been essentially barren of Patriots scheme ILBs.

But this is not true this year. There are FOUR candidates. Willis might be gone, but the other three should be there. Although I like Willis I'm not sure the best Patriots scheme ILB, won't turn out to be Harris or eventually DeOssie. Meanwhile Posluzny is a "safe" pick, who can play too.

As for the OLBs, Ayodele hasn't been great, and Crowder was carefully studied by the Pats, and they decided his knees would not make for a long career. Crowder has beaten the odds, so far. That leaves only three there too. Belichick has preferred bigger DEs to convert.

Are you aware that BB liked Vilma and Ernie Sims? If not, then maybe you should expand your list. Other distinctions you make are debatable. For example, you say that Haggans and Hartwell would not have fit the Pats system, although they flourished in 3-4 variants elsewhere. Maybe BB did not pursue Hartwell as a FA 3 years ago because of cost, because he already had ILBs he valued, or a multitude of reasons, not necessarily because Hartwell did "not fit the system", as you stated. The Hartwell of today is not the same player as the Hartwell who racked up 191 tackles in the Ravens 3-4. The idea that Clint Ingram or Daryl Smith could not play for the Pats is your opinion, and not mine. The Pats tend not to draft 3-4 OLBs high, IMO, because the conversion from DE involves risk, and in rd 1 risk should be reduced. They tend not to draft 3-4 ILBs (a pool of prospects which includes college 4-3 OLBs, according to BB) IMO because when you have a dominant D-Line ideally you don't want to spend #1 picks on ILBs, since behind Wilfork and Warren average players can be effective, as we saw with Bruschi and Seau last year... until the games vs SD and Indy, when Seymour played poorly and Bruschi was exposed.

There have been numerous candidates who could have played for the Pats over the last 10 years, and there are bound to be several who could do it in this draft. The trick is identifying them, and not falling in love with a single player. As a final note, BB and Saban run similar defensive schemes and Zach Thomas, all 5'10'' and 228 lbs of him, said he loved Saban's 3-4 and it suited him better than the 4-3. The myth of the "ideal LBer" for the Pats has grown to ridiculous proportions, and needs to be dispelled.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Are you aware that BB liked Vilma and Ernie Sims? If not, then maybe you should expand your list. Other distinctions you make are debatable. For example, you say that Haggans and Hartwell would not have fit the Pats system, although they flourished in 3-4 variants elsewhere. Maybe BB did not pursue Hartwell as a FA 3 years ago because of cost, because he already had ILBs he valued, or a multitude of reasons, not necessarily because Hartwell did "not fit the system", as you stated. The Hartwell of today is not the same player as the Hartwell who racked up 191 tackles in the Ravens 3-4. The idea that Clint Ingram or Daryl Smith could not play for the Pats is your opinion, and not mine. The Pats tend not to draft 3-4 OLBs high, IMO, because the conversion from DE involves risk, and in rd 1 risk should be reduced. They tend not to draft 3-4 ILBs (a pool of prospects which includes college 4-3 OLBs, according to BB) IMO because when you have a dominant D-Line ideally you don't want to spend #1 picks on ILBs, since behind Wilfork and Warren average players can be effective, as we saw with Bruschi and Seau last year... until the games vs SD and Indy, when Seymour played poorly and Bruschi was exposed.

There have been numerous candidates who could have played for the Pats over the last 10 years, and there are bound to be several who could do it in this draft. The trick is identifying them, and not falling in love with a single player.

But I love Patrick Willis and I want everyone to love him too.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Harris is good and I like him.He is considered to be a 2 down tackle to tackle guy. He is also a consensus 3rd rounder. Why not get both, we will need them going forward?

No, Harris WAS CONSIDERED to be a two down, very instinctual, smart, tackle-to-tackle guy. That was true when everyone thought he would run a 4.8.

But he ran a 4.55. Thats' SUPER-STAR speed for a LB.

I think his stock has soared since then. He will never get past the second round, and may not clear the first round either.

I can see the Pat's drafting him in round one.

But I'd love it, if the Pats drafted a pair of LBs in Round one.

 

[patchick]

No, Harris WAS CONSIDERED to be a two down, very instinctual, smart, tackle-to-tackle guy. That was true when everyone thought he would run a 4.8.

But he ran a 4.55. Thats' SUPER-STAR speed for a LB.

I think his stock has soared since then.

I agree with all of this...but what does it mean? Why the disconnect between reputation and combine performance?

Maybe the role he played on his team not give him the chance to showcase his athleticism; maybe he trained up for combine-specific performance; maybe he has trouble translating the athletic ability to the field

Anybody with Michigan insight have a clue?

 

[PonyExpress]

I really don't think this criticism of Harris is valid. The reason I say that is not because of timed speeds. It's because if you watch Harris, he recognizes a pass play develop, makes a decision, and changes direction very naturally and athletically. This makes him play faster in coverage than others who may have faster raw speed, but whose decision making process and coordination is not as sharp. I don't see these criticisms as valid. I don't really know why people are saying this about Harris. Maybe because he is best known for attacking vs. the run, with 15 TFLs last year. But that doesn't mean he can't cover.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Kipers lates mock has us taking Willis and Nelson!!! Doesn't get any better than that. Although I have some reservations about Nelson.

And Pony, just because some don't think Harris is a good as Willis doean't mean that Harris is not a very good player. He is and I'd love to have both of them.

 

[PonyExpress]

Kipers lates mock has us taking Willis and Nelson!!! Doesn't get any better than that. Although I have some reservations about Nelson.

And Pony, just because some don't think Harris is a good as Willis doean't mean that Harris is not a very good player. He is and I'd love to have both of them.

I think Siler, Harris and Willis are all very close. Siler didn't test well and I think the reason is because he is still not 100% from the knee injury (partial ligament tear) which he played through. But the fact he played through it to help his team to a national title, knowing he would appear to be less effective on tape and possibly damage his draft standing, tells me alot about his character and leadership, crucial factors for a #1 pick. He was dominant prior to the injury. Watching him on the sidelines at the BCS title game was interesting. He was wearing a chain of dog-tags that each player on the team had contributed to, a symbol of teamwork. Siler had thought it up to bring the team closer together. It's not a great or original idea, but it shows the respect he commanded with his teammates, and the authority he had with them. Willis has a similar charisma, and Harris has a less vocal leadership style but just as gritty. All of them can be team captains in the NFL. I give the edge to Siler. Just a personal preference. He's only a true junior and has plenty of room to grow, already at 6'2'' 241. Most NFL LBers gain 8-12 lbs over their first few years in the NFL, and Siler will be playing at 6'2'' 250+ for the Pats 2008-10. I feel that size can be overrated by some Pats fans as a necessary component of a "Patriot LBer", but it's never a bad thing provided the guy can play.

 

[TheBaronPatriot]

A lot of people consider Beason a Mike LB. And although he's never played in a traditional 3-4 defense, the will LB position at Miami is actually responsible for 2 gaps in that defense. Of course all the reads are different and the bodies are in the wrong place. I guess from looking at film of the Miami games, BB must have a decent idea of how Beason could function as a mike in his defense.
And I know BB is a genius and all that, but I still can not figure out how a six foot 236 pound LB fits as a mike in his defense. All I can think is that BB alters the scheme based on the lack of a traditional mike.

BB has gone on record saying that 'I never said our LBs play a 2 gap system'.
This was during an interview when Seau first came onboard.

Everything here on in is theory... Granted I don't think you'd see a Beason type backer playing on running downs much but I think he could get the job using his quickness and instincts to fill the gap. Not stack the guard and shed.

So on passing down his speed would be an asset and he would be assigned one gap to defend in case of a run. The way this works is that he would be covered by the D line who would slant to allow him to only play 1 gap. The OLB would also slant essentially serving as a DE and morph the 3-4 into an instant 4-3.... Instant confusion, chaos... perfect.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I feel that size can be overrated by some Pats fans as a necessary component of a "Patriot LBer", but it's never a bad thing provided the guy can play.

Perhaps size is overrated, but there was the Belichick remark around the Jacksonville game regarding the decision process when it came time to make a choice relative to MJD's value to the team. His essential point was a good 'small' college player has a higher likelihood of failure when compared to a larger player with similar skills sets.

As I recall, the lightest LB prospect BB has acquired in the past couple years was Monty Beisel at 238, next comes UDFA Cory Mays at 245. We can speculate about the Vilma remarks in Patriot Reign, but for me personally, Vilma wearing a snazzy green uniform doesn't fill me with foreboding. I probably haven't watched enough tape, but I don't have any clear recollection of Vilma fighting off a block and getting to the ball carrier. Hobson and Thomas yes, Vilma no.

You are welcome to draft 260 lb. Guards, 175 lb. Safeties, or 225 lb. Linebackers if you think they can get the job done, I'll stick to my weight/height prejudices.

 

[PonyExpress]

BB said Ernie Sims (5'11'' 230 lbs) could "play in any defense" including the 3-4, and Michael Holley, who spent a year attending meetings with Pats coaches, wrote that BB considered trading up for Vilma (6'0'' 230 lbs) in 2004. Zach Thomas (5'10'' 228 lbs) played in a similar system for Saban and claims that Saban's 3-4 is the defense best suited to his skills. If a player can play, BB will find a way to use him and adjust his "system" accordingly. Your opinion is interesting, but it is your opinion, and not BB's. I think I'll go with Belichick's opinion (otherwise Tully Banta-Cain would be starting instead of Adalius Thomas next season! ).