Trade down?

[RayClay]

Of course you need a partner, but this seems like a draft with a lot of similar graded players, some of which will end up in the first, some far down in the second.

Trade our first, our own third and our lower fourth and we still have two almost at the bottom of 3 picks [Mankins high fourth].

I could see 3 2nds and 2-3 thirds easily, if we think the value is in that area.

For every mock I see with our prospects [mentioned DT, CB and other positions in our media] in round one, there are 2-3 from the middle to the end of two, meaning picking up potential #1s at CB, DT, DE, WR, or RB?

Thoughts

 

[jboston19]

I can easily see it, but I could last year and there didn't seem to be the value available to make it worth it. Seattle picked up a 4 to move down.

 

[Ivan]

It depends upon who is there when they are picking. Of there is a player or players stool on the board who they believe will turn into a to player at their position then take them, if not then see what is available for deals. Trading just for the sake of trading makes little sense to me, it's all about who is available and how they got with the Patriots.

 

[RayClay]

It depends upon who is there when they are picking. Of there is a player or players stool on the board who they believe will turn into a to player at their position then take them, if not then see what is available for deals. Trading just for the sake of trading makes little sense to me, it's all about who is available and how they got with the Patriots.

Of course and I'm not a draft expert at all. I am checking out articles and mock drafts and, not knowing who the Pats like, can see an unusual amount of players at positions that could help, that are rated lower first round somewhere, lower second round elsewhere.

Again, I agree with your point completely. If the Pats see there guy available they take him. Could it be a draft where they see similar grades, based on what the pundits see? Maybe get two flawed CBs or DTs instead of one and still have a second and third to mop up.

Of course the other variable is someone trading value to you at that spot.

 

[50-yard-line]

My only issue is that this is already a VERY DEEP roster. How many rookies will have a chance to make the team?

All depends on how they rate who's available, I guess. I could see them moving around this year with so many picks clustered at the end of 3/beginning of 4.

 

[Ivan]

Of course and I'm not a draft expert at all. I am checking out articles and mock drafts and, not knowing who the Pats like, can see an unusual amount of players at positions that could help, that are rated lower first round somewhere, lower second round elsewhere.

Again, I agree with your point completely. If the Pats see there guy available they take him. Could it be a draft where they see similar grades, based on what the pundits see? Maybe get two flawed CBs or DTs instead of one and still have a second and third to mop up.

Of course the other variable is someone trading value to you at that spot.

I agree, I like the prospects between 25-80 a lot. What they do is going to depend greatly upon who rises and who falls and how they rank for the Patriots. Friday will be a really interesting draft day this year.

 

[ashley]

My only issue is that this is already a VERY DEEP roster. How many rookies will have a chance to make the team?

All depends on how they rate who's available, I guess. I could see them moving around this year with so many picks clustered at the end of 3/beginning of 4.

I agree that overall we have a very deep roster, but I think we could use upgrades at CB, DT and OG. I think those are all pretty deep positions in this draft so if we could obtain more picks, it might be a possibility.

 

[scott99]

Of course you need a partner, but this seems like a draft with a lot of similar graded players, some of which will end up in the first, some far down in the second.

Trade our first, our own third and our lower fourth and we still have two almost at the bottom of 3 picks [Mankins high fourth].

I could see 3 2nds and 2-3 thirds easily, if we think the value is in that area.

For every mock I see with our prospects [mentioned DT, CB and other positions in our media] in round one, there are 2-3 from the middle to the end of two, meaning picking up potential #1s at CB, DT, DE, WR, or RB?

Thoughts

I can't see anyone trading THREE 2nds and TWO 3rds for a #32 overall and #96 and a 4th. Don't know any team that has three 2nds anyway.

 

[mgteich]

I can't see anyone trading THREE 2nds and TWO 3rds for a #32 overall and #96 and a 4th. Don't know any team that has three 2nds anyway.

We can easily have 3 seconds in place of 32, 64 and 96. We could trade our 32 to BUFF for 50 and 81. We would then trade 81 and 96 with Indy for 61.

NEW PICKS
50, 61, 64, 97, 101, 131

 

[BlueThunder]

Even BB doesn't know what he'll do on draft day.......he probably doesn't even know until pick 26 or so rolls around......but it's fun to speculate !

 

[JMC00]

Well if you read the subject I just posted about, you'd have to feel pretty decent about what will come out of a trade down with the 1st pick.

 

[ausbacker]

I'm generally in favor of trade downs mainly because I don't see that much difference between a pick in the late 20's/early 30's to one in the 40's or 50's. That said, if a talent worth trading up for is available, you trade up.

 

[RayClay]

I can't see anyone trading THREE 2nds and TWO 3rds for a #32 overall and #96 and a 4th. Don't know any team that has three 2nds anyway.

we have a second now.

 

[BTTA]

My only issue is that this is already a VERY DEEP roster. How many rookies will have a chance to make the team?.

There's room for new starters at OG, LB (for a while), CB, DT, and 3rd down back.
There's room for improvement on the 2-deep at every interior line position on the offense and defense, in addition to the positions mentioned above.

If the talent and demonstrated ability is there in training camp, they could turn over 9 or 10 positions. It would be unusual for that many to come from the draft, but only because they don't have the picks to do it.

 

[50-yard-line]

There's room for new starters at OG, LB (for a while), CB, DT, and 3rd down back.
There's room for improvement on the 2-deep at every interior line position on the offense and defense, in addition to the positions mentioned above.

If the talent and demonstrated ability is there in training camp, they could turn over 9 or 10 positions. It would be unusual for that many to come from the draft, but only because they don't have the picks to do it.

I find it hard to believe that a draft pick will supplant one of the 3 top DT's (they're unlikely to get anyone with Easley's ceiling). I do see them taking a big body like Philips or Bennett.

OG, I agree...I wouldn't be surprised to see 2 OLs coming from the draft and sticking - so maybe they draft 3, like last year. But I doubt Wendell's going anywhere. Versatile vet.

Unless there's a top prospect corner in the draft, CB is a ? to me. The Pats are weak on stars there, but they're deep with solid players. Few rookies would walk in and step above Ryan, Dennard, Butler, Arrington and the 3 new guys. And they still have Dax Swanson, too, and they liked him a lot last year. Same with S - we're deep and it would take a top prospect to upgrade.

I haven't heard much about LBs in the draft, but I could see them taking a stop-gap (still think they might re-sign Fletcher).

3rd down back? I doubt it. Unless they really don't like White and don't think Cadet can pick up the blocking assignments.

The team lost Revis, Browner, Wilfork, Ayers, Casillas and possibly Connolly.

They picked up Sheard, Chandler, a LB and 3 CBs. On the OL, they've got a strong developmental guy in Flemming and they're getting Mayo back. This is a very deep roster.

 

[1960Pats]

It seems that every year UDFA's make the Pats roster, and there are plenty of late rounders who make it too.

Call me crazy, but if I were a HC/GM in the NFL I'd use the same tactics that the Pats use. I'd try to pick up more draft picks, which would give me dibs on more players.

 

[BTTA]

I find it hard to believe that a draft pick will supplant one of the 3 top DT's (they're unlikely to get anyone with Easley's ceiling). I do see them taking a big body like Philips or Bennett.

OG, I agree...I wouldn't be surprised to see 2 OLs coming from the draft and sticking - so maybe they draft 3, like last year. But I doubt Wendell's going anywhere. Versatile vet.

Unless there's a top prospect corner in the draft, CB is a ? to me. The Pats are weak on stars there, but they're deep with solid players. Few rookies would walk in and step above Ryan, Dennard, Butler, Arrington and the 3 new guys. And they still have Dax Swanson, too, and they liked him a lot last year. Same with S - we're deep and it would take a top prospect to upgrade.

I haven't heard much about LBs in the draft, but I could see them taking a stop-gap (still think they might re-sign Fletcher).

3rd down back? I doubt it. Unless they really don't like White and don't think Cadet can pick up the blocking assignments.

The team lost Revis, Browner, Wilfork, Ayers, Casillas and possibly Connolly.

They picked up Sheard, Chandler, a LB and 3 CBs. On the OL, they've got a strong developmental guy in Flemming and they're getting Mayo back. This is a very deep roster.

I'm not seeing it as deep yet, by any means. I'm not doubting that it will get there, but it isn't there at all now.

One or two of last year's rookie O linemen could end up being starter caliber, or just adequate back ups. TBD.

Hightower won't be in playing shape when the season starts. Mayo is a huge risk given his recent injury history and contract status. The team could easily be without both of those guys for the first six to eight games. That's a massive hole.

Is the coaching staff happy about giving the huge number of Wilfork snaps to the guys on the current roster? I'm sure Easely will get some of the interior pass rushing snaps, but that's not what Wilfork's snaps were about. The interior big boys formula is a work in progress.

Perhaps the coaches are happy with the current CB's, perhaps not. We'll see. But it wouldn't be surprising to see them go after one with a high pick, which would be an indication.

So I think the team has a serious need at IL, and that one of the first three picks should end up getting significant playing time at either G or DT, depending on how the picks turn out and when they are made.

 

[RayClay]

My only issue is that this is already a VERY DEEP roster. How many rookies will have a chance to make the team?

All depends on how they rate who's available, I guess. I could see them moving around this year with so many picks clustered at the end of 3/beginning of 4.

Yeah, my trade down involves also trading up for multiple 2nd rounders. They certainly don't need volume.

 

[varjao]

My only issue is that this is already a VERY DEEP roster. How many rookies will have a chance to make the team?

That's what I thought before Free Agency, keeping the SB team would not only make us favorites again but It would put us in position to trade up because I could see room for only 4 or 5 rookies, of course I expected some players to go, some low FA come , that normal rotation on depth players but as a matter of fact we lost 4 impact starters on Leavis, Browner, Vince and Vereen, Connoly looks out and we lost important depth too in Casillas and Ayers, so things have changed. Now we are in the draft market as usual, without luxury.

As for drafting players that are cut in the end of training camp like happened last year with Gallon and Jemea Thomas I don't think BB sees that as a waste, it's a process of filtering to field the best possible team, BB doesn't give a shi.t to draft status, FA status, etc.. If he needs to cut a 4th rounder to keep a udfa he sees no problem at all I believe.

 

[mgteich]

If he needs to cut a 4th rounder to keep a udfa he sees no problem at all I believe.

Belichick has never cut a healthy 4th rounder before the season started.