* Top 64: What Are Your First 4 Picks?? *

[ctpatsfan77]

1 - And what if Bodden or McCourty gets injured, what kind of depth do we have?

By that logic, the Pats should use 1A on a backup for TFB.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

1 - And what if Bodden or McCourty gets injured, what kind of depth do we have?

2 - Did BB pass Matthews because of the player that he was in college or did he know what he would turn into? We know BB passed on who he was, we don't know what he would do if he had a time machine handy.

On CB depth, we would have Arrington, Butler, Wheatley and Wilhite. Not pro bowlers, but adequate defenders in our defense.

I think BB passed on Mathews because Mathews did not project well at setting the edge on running plays. If we were to play Baltimore and Mathews was at OLB for us, we would see Rice have a career day.

One reason I think BB passed on tons of USC talent over the past decade is because the Pete Carroll system does not produce the types of players that project well in BB's defense.

 

[SteveBelichick]

I actually agree, it's definitely not the way I'm leaning. But I think the value proposition at the top of the draft is there for that position, so I'm not ruling it out entirely. (IMO the top CB prospects look much more elite than Ingram does.) But I hope and believe that DE & OLB will end up with good value alignments.

You could be right about the CBs, I haven't researched much or watched video at all on them, since I think it'd be overkill to get another one. McCourty is one hell of a player, and has been a playmaker for the past two games.

I'd like to have a top DE or OLB fall to the Oakland pick, but I don't see it happening. I hope it does and Ingram is still around 1B, but that'd be a dream come true. Still, I see Ingram as the best choice for 1A, but that's a matter of opinion. It happens I see the D as a young unit that is learning with tons of potential, while the offense is on the decline and needs to protect Brady, who's the team difference maker.

1 - And what if Bodden or McCourty gets injured, what kind of depth do we have?

2 - Did BB pass Matthews because of the player that he was in college or did he know what he would turn into? We know BB passed on who he was, we don't know what he would do if he had a time machine handy.

ctpatsfan77 said it well, I don't see any reason for drafting depth with a first rounder - specially CB depth. Belichick drafts in the first round guys who'll contribute a lot, and looks for "four down players" like McCourty, guys who can contribute on special teams too.

I don't think I was clear with my Matthews argument: he's a 10-sack-a-season guy, that's for sure, but he's not a player for a Belichick defense. Coach wants guys who can cover, stop the run, spy the QB, spy the HB, read the play, react, and blitz too. Matthews can blitz and that's it. He's not a good fit and even if Belichick had a time machine he wouldn't draft him. And as I stated before, while he gets the numbers, he just runs into the backfield and hopes something is close to him. Belichick doesn't want such a defender.

On CB depth, we would have Arrington, Butler, Wheatley and Wilhite. Not pro bowlers, but adequate defenders in our defense.

I think BB passed on Mathews because Mathews did not project well at setting the edge on running plays. If we were to play Baltimore and Mathews was at OLB for us, we would see Rice have a career day.

One reason I think BB passed on tons of USC talent over the past decade is because the Pete Carroll system does not produce the types of players that project well in BB's defense.

Well put, I totally agree.

 

[jsull87]

After BJGE and Woodhead's form the past few weeks... can you really say that you want to spend our 1st pick on a RB? I honestly have no idea who i would pick because this team seems to be solid (not great) across the board... and most are young developing players... i just don't know what to do with these picks hey

 

[TriplecHamp]

After BJGE and Woodhead's form the past few weeks... can you really say that you want to spend our 1st pick on a RB? I honestly have no idea who i would pick because this team seems to be solid (not great) across the board... and most are young developing players... i just don't know what to do with these picks hey

two positions I think we can upgrade are OG and WR. Pass Rusher would be nice as well. I am officially sold on the DE play and the RB play although I wouldn't mind a FA pickup at RB (Bradshaw/Brown/Williams)

 

[sg14]

Not to rain on your parade, but Oakland put up another 500 plus yards of offense today, while shutting down the Seahawks. Two of the first 3 plays were sacks, Seymour and Kelly destroyed their OL.

They actually look scary good, a power team on D&O, I don't see their pick being anything above mid level at best. ((next week against KC will be interesting.))

Back to your regular scheduled draft talk.

 

[jsull87]

two positions I think we can upgrade are OG and WR. Pass Rusher would be nice as well. I am officially sold on the DE play and the RB play although I wouldn't mind a FA pickup at RB (Bradshaw/Brown/Williams)

i understand but with ninko playing well cunningham improving and TBC as a rush specialist... my point is that if that position was left alone we would still be good next year. Same with WR as we also have Price in his redshirt year. You are correct about the OG upgrade tho and maybe center... but once again there are no real glaring holes i can see on this team. Special when you add in Warren, Bodden, McGowan, Faulk and maybe even Mankins (who if signed shores up the OG depth)

 

[TriplecHamp]

i understand but with ninko playing well cunningham improving and TBC as a rush specialist... my point is that if that position was left alone we would still be good next year. Same with WR as we also have Price in his redshirt year. You are correct about the OG upgrade tho and maybe center... but once again there are no real glaring holes i can see on this team. Special when you add in Warren, Bodden, McGowan, Faulk and maybe even Mankins (who if signed shores up the OG depth)

Imo the outside WR play has been very spotty. Outside of a big broken play in two weeks, the Tate and Branch have a combined 8 catches for 98 yards. Branch is a little banged up once again so Im saying we should grab our future number 1 in the first couple of rounds or pick up a number 1 in FA. The depth isn't really there either, if Branch goes down we are in trouble.

 

[SteveBelichick]

After BJGE and Woodhead's form the past few weeks... can you really say that you want to spend our 1st pick on a RB? I honestly have no idea who i would pick because this team seems to be solid (not great) across the board... and most are young developing players... i just don't know what to do with these picks hey

That is a great statement, the team is solid but unspectacular. That's how the Patriots used to win, so we can't really complain. If anything, I'd like to see this upcoming draft strengthening the trenches.
As jsull87 said later on his post, the defense could very well be set.
But about BJGE and Woodhead, I like what the Patriots get out of them, but they won't make any team put 8 guys in the box, and that's something Brady needs opposing defenses to at least consider. Green-Ellis runs well when the hole is there (something Maroney couldn't do, for example), but he's not a playmaker per se like [I believe] Ingram [will be]. Woodhead is also a great contributor and I believe he'll stick for years to come, but he'll be the Faulk: he'll take the direct snaps, the draws, block some, receive many, and be very valuable to the offense, but never a featured back.
And, since the team doesn't have any holes right now (entering 2011 the O-line will be a hole), it can't hurt to add a player like Ingram for all the reasons I stated before.
But as sg14 said, we'll be lucky if Ingram is around the Raiders pick. Because Quinn, Bowers, Bailey, Clayborn, Dareus and the top CBs won't be.

Imo the outside WR play has been very spotty. Outside of a big broken play in two weeks, the Tate and Branch have a combined 8 catches for 98 yards. Branch is a little banged up once again so Im saying we should grab our future number 1 in the first couple of rounds or pick up a number 1 in FA. The depth isn't really there either, if Branch goes down we are in trouble.

That's true. I'm not confortable drafting WR with high picks (Chad Jackson and Bethel Johnson, anyone?), but I think it could happen. And maybe it should. But I'd go for O-line help first.

Hey, speaking of it, I think tomorrow I'll finish my mock v2.0 :singing:

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

This team needs a #1 WR, especially with the lack of a true playmaker at RB. None of these WR's dictate coverage. For all the complaining we've done about him, Moss did.

It's taking so long for these guys to get open now that the defense can really push up and just focus on the short/intermediate passing game. Welker is having a much more difficult time getting open. Guys like Branch and Tate don't need to be double teamed on the outside. Defenses can key on Welker much more.

We don't need an all-time great at WR like we had in Moss, but we need a guy that dictates coverage. Boldin would have been the perfect fit to be that guy in this new style of offense. Hopefully we pursue a guy like V-Jax or draft AJ Green (preferably the latter) in the offseason. I think Tate is a great #2 WR to have. Green is a gamebreaker like Moss with deep speed, size, and hands, but he actually has the balls to go over the middle.

OL has to start being addressed as well. I felt it was a pretty decent need going into this past draft, but it wasn't addressed. Light isn't getting any younger, Mankins looks like he's gone, Koppen gets blown up at the POA by good DT's/NT's, and Neal never makes it through a full year without getting hurt. Brady is getting knocked around way too much. I think you have try to work something out with Logan so Brady's blindside is protected well with Vollmer and Mankins down the line.

Overall, I'd say the team needs are WR, OLB, OL, RB. We could use a DE too, but with Warren coming back and guys like Deaderick, Pyror, and Brace hopefully improving, it's not as dire of a need as it was thought to be. Of course everyone wants another Seymour, so if we get a chance at a guy like Fairley, obviously you've got to consider it.

I'd like to see us go WR and OLB or DL in first and then get a RB in the 2nd.

 

[Peachhead]

OL has to start being addressed as well. I felt it was a pretty decent need going into this past draft, but it wasn't addressed. Light isn't getting any younger, Mankins looks like he's gone, Koppen gets blown up at the POA by good DT's/NT's, and Neal never makes it through a full year without getting hurt. Brady is getting knocked around way too much. I think you have try to work something out with Logan so Brady's blindside is protected well with Vollmer and Mankins down the line.

Brady usually had all day back there against the Vikes. And that been more the rule than the exception this year. I'm not saying we should ignore OL in the draft, but to me it's waaay down on the list.

Besides, I don't like to draft non-LTs before rd 5 or so (well maybe rd 4 for RTs). Good ones grow on trees.

 

[patchick]

Besides, I don't like to draft non-LTs before rd 5 or so (well maybe rd 4 for RTs). Good ones grow on trees.

Hmm, so that makes Mankins, Kaczur and Vollmer (who is, after all, our RT) bad draft picks?

I thought Pouncey and Mangold were well worth first-round picks at the time. A top-flight center makes your whole offense work better. Those two were clearly the best C prospects of the past 5+ years, though, and I don't see a player like that in this draft.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Hmm, so that makes Mankins, Kaczur and Vollmer (who is, after all, our RT) bad draft picks?

I thought Pouncey and Mangold were well worth first-round picks at the time. A top-flight center makes your whole offense work better. Those two were clearly the best C prospects of the past 5+ years, though, and I don't see a player like that in this draft.

I can't speak for Peach, but it makes them college LTs whom Dante switched to new positions.

 

[Peachhead]

Hmm, so that makes Mankins, Kaczur and Vollmer (who is, after all, our RT) bad draft picks?

I thought Pouncey and Mangold were well worth first-round picks at the time. A top-flight center makes your whole offense work better. Those two were clearly the best C prospects of the past 5+ years, though, and I don't see a player like that in this draft.

Yeah, Mankins was a bad pick, at least in terms of value. I mean he was an excellent OG. But we almost paid north of 7 mil a year for a guy that's been replaced (and I would argue improved upon-less false starts now) by a guy who went undrafted. And Mankins is insulted Kraft didn't open the wallet even wider. That's what happens when you take a guy in the first. They expect to be paid like first rounders.

Vollmer may be our RT currently, but I have no doubt he's our future LT and I think he was drafted to be just that. Light's getting older, has increasingly bigger holes in his game and only had a year on his contract when Vollmer was drafted.

Kaczur has been OK, but nothing spectacular. We've had guys like Greg Robinson-Randall and Ryan O'Callaghan (4th and 5th rounders) do just as good a job at that spot.

Pouncey and Mangold are excellent OCs. No doubt. But remember, Koppen was a 5th rounder who has started from his second game as a pro (and we won the SB his rookie year). And up until a year or so ago he was playing at an elite level.

I'm not saying early round guys can't be studs at OG, OC & RT. I'm saying I prefer getting 95% of the production for a fraction of the price.

 

[patsfaninpa]

Yeah, Mankins was a bad pick, at least in terms of value. I mean he was an excellent OG. But we almost paid north of 7 mil a year for a guy that's been replaced (and I would argue improved upon-less false starts now) by a guy who went undrafted. And Mankins is insulted Kraft didn't open the wallet even wider. That's what happens when you take a guy in the first. They expect to be paid like first rounders.

Vollmer may be our RT currently, but I have no doubt he's our future LT and I think he was drafted to be just that. Light's getting older, has increasingly bigger holes in his game and only had a year on his contract when Vollmer was drafted.

Kaczur has been OK, but nothing spectacular. We've had guys like Greg Robinson-Randall and Ryan O'Callaghan (4th and 5th rounders) do just as good a job at that spot.

Pouncey and Mangold are excellent OCs. No doubt. But remember, Koppen was a 5th rounder who has started from his second game as a pro (and we won the SB his rookie year). And up until a year or so ago he was playing at an elite level.

I'm not saying early round guys can't be studs at OG, OC & RT. I'm saying I prefer getting 95% of the production for a fraction of the price.

Mankins wasn't paid 7m per year. His original contract was 5yr/6.4m. Avg. cap hit 1.3m For a pro-bowl caliber player, that's tremendous value. Not only was it not a bad pick. Can't believe you said that. It was a great pick.

If you want to argue he's not worth 7m per. That's another debate. But, to call him a bad pick is so wrong it's not even debateable.

 

[Peachhead]

Mankins wasn't paid 7m per year. His original contract was 5yr/6.4m. Avg. cap hit 1.3m For a pro-bowl caliber player, that's tremendous value. Not only was it not a bad pick. Can't believe you said that. It was a great pick.

If you want to argue he's not worth 7m per. That's another debate. But, to call him a bad pick is so wrong it's not even debateable.

To clarify: The 7 mil per I mentioned is what I think we almost gave him in the offseason. And he wants more. Which doesn't surprise me. Guys who were first round picks like to be paid that way thoughout their careers. And he's been replaced by an undrafted guy who makes a fraction of that.

Even going back to his draft. He cost us a first rounder! Good OGs grow on trees. Dante and BB have proven it again and again. We didn't need to spend a 1st on an OG (and if I could find my draft day posts from that draft I was griping about the same thing back then). While I agree, 1.3 mil per from his rookie contract is outstanding in 2010 cap dollars (and wasn't bad in '05 dollars either) that money and 1st round pick could have gone to a harder to find position. And we probably wouldn't be having an OG hold out and get insulted because we don't want to set a new highwater mark for the position.

From a football standpoint Mankins was tremendous guard. I wasn't disputing that. From a business standpoint he was easily replaced by a guy making a fraction of even his (Mankins') rookie deal. I think therefore it's a pretty safe bet a lower round guy could have done just fine at LG had we not drafted Mankins (i.e. Mankins was a bad value then and especially at what he wants now).

 

[patsfaninpa]

To clarify: The 7 mil per I mentioned is what I think we almost gave him in the offseason. And he wants more. Which doesn't surprise me. Guys who were first round picks like to be paid that way thoughout their careers. And he's been replaced by an undrafted guy who makes a fraction of that.

Even going back to his draft. He cost us a first rounder! Good OGs grow on trees. Dante and BB have proven it again and again. We didn't need to spend a 1st on an OG (and if I could find my draft day posts from that draft I was griping about the same thing back then). While I agree, 1.3 mil per from his rookie contract is outstanding in 2010 cap dollars (and wasn't bad in '05 dollars either) that money and 1st round pick could have gone to a harder to find position. And we probably wouldn't be having an OG hold out and get insulted because we don't want to set a new highwater mark for the position.

From a football standpoint Mankins was tremendous guard. I wasn't disputing that. From a business standpoint he was easily replaced by a guy making a fraction of even his (Mankins') rookie deal. I think therefore it's a pretty safe bet a lower round guy could have done just fine at LG had we not drafted Mankins (i.e. Mankins was a bad value then and especially at what he wants now).

Don't know any way to describe your assessment of Mankins first contract other than this. You are wrong. Also, he was the last pick of the 1st round. Here's a link to the 2005 draft. Tell me which 2nd rounder is even close to as good as Mankins please?


2005 NFL Draft Listing | Pro-Football-Reference.com

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

Brady usually had all day back there against the Vikes. And that been more the rule than the exception this year. I'm not saying we should ignore OL in the draft, but to me it's waaay down on the list.

Besides, I don't like to draft non-LTs before rd 5 or so (well maybe rd 4 for RTs). Good ones grow on trees.

Yeah, because judging the OL solely against a team that hasn't had a sack since October 15th and doesnt blitz is going to decide what type of shape the OL is in. It's games like this where the OL gives you a false sense of security. Then you go play a real defense that throws some exotic looks at you and blitzes, and Brady is under fire all day. Brady has been hit and sacked way too often this year.

 

[Lamanai]

I'm not saying we should ignore OL in the draft, but to me it's waaay down on the list.

Besides, I don't like to draft non-LTs before rd 5 or so (well maybe rd 4 for RTs). Good ones grow on trees.[/QUOTE]



Peach, while I agree with you to some extent in not blowing out our 1st rounders on OGs, I disagree with waiting until round 5. Here's my allegory:

I went apple picking last month - later in the afternoon. Lots of fruit still on the trees. Upon closer inspection, the really premium apples had all been picked over. People who came earlier in the day had time to take only the best. What was left was not the shiny stuff you see staring at you when you first walk into Whole Foods. The stuff still hanging had worms or a little rot not showing in the front. Not fully ripe, misshapen, you know...what you ultimately use as ingredients for Shaw's brand apple cider...

Waiting until round 5 or 6 is more likely to get you Elgin, Stephenson, Hilliard or Oldenburg than Koppen. Give me one or two OG/OC from the 2nd to 4th round. That way you are not over spending, but you are probably getting your pick of one of the top 5 guys at their position.

JMO.

 

[cstjohn17]

Yeah, Mankins was a bad pick, at least in terms of value. I mean he was an excellent OG. But we almost paid north of 7 mil a year for a guy that's been replaced (and I would argue improved upon-less false starts now) by a guy who went undrafted. And Mankins is insulted Kraft didn't open the wallet even wider. That's what happens when you take a guy in the first. They expect to be paid like first rounders.

If that is your idea of a bad pick than I am sorry to say you have no idea what you are talking about. I love the draft and I love having lots of draft picks but the truth is that draftees (even 1st rounders) are 50/50 at best to ever play meaningful snaps. Mankins played 5 years, never missed a game or practice, made the probowl. He was an out of the park grand slam of spic porportions.

I mean look at this list from 2005, a whole lot of flops, has been and never beens.


National Football League: NFL Draft History