Which players would trade up to 14 to get?

[tanked_as_usual]

Who's the oldest starting LB?
Which starting LB has lost more of his game than the others?
Which starting LB came out on passing downs?

The answer to all three is, of course, Bruschi, who happens to be an ILB.

Oh.... but you rate OLB as a higher priority, even though they have one player experienced in the system (Woods) that they can keep if they choose (he's an RFA, not a UFA), and a 3rd rounder who had a season to acclimate and try to build up his body. Now, if the team plans to move Thomas inside, the argument would change. However, until I hear that such a move is the team's intention, I'll stick to the opinion that ILB is a bigger priority.

As for Kaczur, I'm not banking success on him moving to guard. I'm noting that I think he could make the transition if it were needed. I'd prefer Neal to stay healthy and keep the job, but I understand that plans must be made in the event that he gets injured again. Both Light and Kaczur are currently in line to be UFAs after the 2010 season (Kaczur is an RFA after next year, too), so drafting a top flight OT now would give that player 1-2 seasons to work into position before the team has to make a decision on a player who will be a 33 year old left tackle.

you keep bringing up woods like he's a good player........as a rookie who wasn't in anyone's plans at the beginning of the season, guyton has already proven more adept at ILB than woods has ever shown at OLB......so again, we only go back to the pats having 2 OLBs (32 Y.O. and 34 Y.O.) who have proven they can be effective and the 34 year old is proving he is old......round and round we go......the biggest dropoff last season was in the number of sacks from the OLB position, and the passing game suffered because of it....the only thing I will grant is that it has been historically easier to find outside guys via F.A., but you can say the same at ILB with phifer and seau

if you need to give an OT a couple of years, then he doesn't belong in the first day.....as rookies:

light started 12 games
mankins started 16 games
koppen started 15 games
kaczur started 11 games...at LT no less

so basically the notion to groom someone for a couple of years is garbage.......you can continue on with your opinion on this, but the above is FACT....and if you need to groom someone, grooming an OLB is much more important at this time

so I go back to my original claim that outside of curry and jenkins, there is nobody worth moving up to 14 for

 

[patchick]

Who's the oldest starting LB?
Which starting LB has lost more of his game than the others?
Which starting LB came out on passing downs?

The answer to all three is, of course, Bruschi, who happens to be an ILB.

Oh.... but you rate OLB as a higher priority

IMO, it's all about AD. If he stays outside, SILB is the need. Move him to SILB and suddenly that position looks great with Mayo, Thomas, Guyton, Bruschi, and Alexander if you want him...and you're in the market for another OLB. So you can either:

A. decide first where you want AD, and draft accordingly;
B. let the draft come to you and take the best impact LB, inside or out.

To wrap this back around to the ostensible topic of the thread, let's assume B for a moment and ask whether there are any LBs of any stripe worth trading up for. At this early stage, I'd say Curry and Brown.

 

[mayoclinic]

IMO, it's all about AD. If he stays outside, SILB is the need. Move him to SILB and suddenly that position looks great with Mayo, Thomas, Guyton, Bruschi, and Alexander if you want him...and you're in the market for another OLB. So you can either:

A. decide first where you want AD, and draft accordingly;
B. let the draft come to you and take the best impact LB, inside or out.

To wrap this back around to the ostensible topic of the thread, let's assume B for a moment and ask whether there are any LBs of any stripe worth trading up for. At this early stage, I'd say Curry and Brown.

That seems to sensible to possibly work.

I could make the same argument with FA "dream" picks that people have been floating. If Julius Peppers somehow became a FA and was willing to sign with the Pats for something less than the GNP, then move AD inside to SILB. If, on the other hand, Arizona somehow misses out on franchising or extending Karlos Dansby and we could get him, move him to SILB and keep Thomas outside. Of course, neither will happen, but it's nice to think about the possibilities. AD gives us a lot of flexibility.

Back to the draft, I agree with Curry but am not sure I see Everett Brown meriting the move up at this point.

 

[Taxed in Maine]

I agree, and it also depends some on Woods. He is a big ?? right now, in my opinion.

He was an UDFA, and now as an RFA, if you tender him at the lowest level, at about $1M, he can be signed without compensation.

But, the next level is the 2nd rd tender, and that would be $1.55M.

Is Pierre Woods worth $1.55M? Is he even worth $1M? I don't know.

The other question is whether his production can be replaced in the short term by Crable, or Redd? Then another rookie brought into the pipeline behind them?

 

[tanked_as_usual]

I agree, and it also depends some on Woods. He is a big ?? right now, in my opinion.

He was an UDFA, and now as an RFA, if you tender him at the lowest level, at about $1M, he can be signed without compensation.

But, the next level is the 2nd rd tender, and that would be $1.55M.

Is Pierre Woods worth $1.55M? Is he even worth $1M? I don't know.

The other question is whether his production can be replaced in the short term by Crable, or Redd? Then another rookie brought into the pipeline behind them?

right, but the problem at OLB is that the players are either old or unknown, so there is a huge need to improve the quality and age in the group........through FA? maybe

 

[patchick]

That seems to sensible to possibly work.

I could make the same argument with FA "dream" picks that people have been floating. If Julius Peppers somehow became a FA and was willing to sign with the Pats for something less than the GNP, then move AD inside to SILB. If, on the other hand, Arizona somehow misses out on franchising or extending Karlos Dansby and we could get him, move him to SILB and keep Thomas outside. Of course, neither will happen, but it's nice to think about the possibilities. AD gives us a lot of flexibility.

Back to the draft, I agree with Curry but am not sure I see Everett Brown meriting the move up at this point.

Wow, agreement on the draft board? Unheard of!

For all the fretting about the LB corps -- and for all that I do want the Pats to add an impact linebacker -- I think they're actually in pretty good shape. Last year they reaped an incredible bumper crop of rookies, and this year looks very promising to find that one last guy to solidify the lineup, especially given the flexibility on where to place him.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on Everette Brown. I'm usually a little gun-shy on conversion projects so high, but Brown looks uncommonly dynamic and great with his hands and has shown steady improvement, unlike the all-physique prospects like Gholston. Plus his high-school TE clips suggest some nice agility and ball skills.

 

[Deus Irae]

you keep bringing up woods like he's a good player........as a rookie who wasn't in anyone's plans at the beginning of the season, guyton has already proven more adept at ILB than woods has ever shown at OLB......so again, we only go back to the pats having 2 OLBs (32 Y.O. and 34 Y.O.) who have proven they can be effective and the 34 year old is proving he is old......round and round we go......the biggest dropoff last season was in the number of sacks from the OLB position, and the passing game suffered because of it....the only thing I will grant is that it has been historically easier to find outside guys via F.A., but you can say the same at ILB with phifer and seau

Your opinion on Woods is your own. I don't happen to agree with it. Furthermore, they drafted an OLB in round 3 last season. Again, Bruschi is the weakest link among the starters. He's an ILB. Therefore, unless the team is going to move Thomas inside on a permanent basis, ILB is the more pressing need.

if you need to give an OT a couple of years, then he doesn't belong in the first day.....as rookies:

light started 12 games
mankins started 16 games
koppen started 15 games
kaczur started 11 games...at LT no less

so basically the notion to groom someone for a couple of years is garbage.......you can continue on with your opinion on this, but the above is FACT....and if you need to groom someone, grooming an OLB is much more important at this time

so I go back to my original claim that outside of curry and jenkins, there is nobody worth moving up to 14 for

1.) I don't believe that I claimed that the OT would need a couple of years. I did note that he would have a couple of years. I prefer that players are able to work into a lineup at an acceptable pace rather than being forced into duty right way, especially with Brady coming back from his injury.

2.) I really don't care about your original claim, because I find it to be outside the scope of the question posed. Feel free to argue it with someone else, however. There are plenty of players that it might be worthwhile to trade up for almost every year. The question was, however, who you would trade up to #14 for. I've yet to see a single mock draft that has Curry fall that far, so why would I bother including him in the discussion?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I agree, and it also depends some on Woods. He is a big ?? right now, in my opinion.

He was an UDFA, and now as an RFA, if you tender him at the lowest level, at about $1M, he can be signed without compensation.

But, the next level is the 2nd rd tender, and that would be $1.55M.

Is Pierre Woods worth $1.55M? Is he even worth $1M? I don't know.

The other question is whether his production can be replaced in the short term by Crable, or Redd? Then another rookie brought into the pipeline behind them?

You forgot an option, signing Woods to a contract extension and bypassing the RFA tender process. They did that with Yates, who was an RFA in 2007; rather than tender him, they signed him to a 3 year contract, much cheaper that first year than tendering him.

Woods, Britt, and Alexander are the three RFAs listed by Miguel on his Free Agency page.
-- Woods would appear to be worth at least a second round tender (based on the teams reaction to his performance at OLB this past season). However, that tender appears to be in the $1.5M ballpark for 2009 and I think might be better spent as a signing bonus for a three year extension. Woods has shown the most progress of any of the young LBs brought to NE with Day Two picks and UDFA signings, I don't think he's hit his ceiling yet, extending him would less expensive and retains a promising LB and very good ST's ace.
-- Britt would bring a 5th round pick if he was signed elsewhere, but that would require the lowest tender in the $1M ballpark. Much too rich for a guy who was bypassed by LeVoir. If BB wants to retain him, sign him to a one or two year contract at NFL minimum with a modest signing bonus. Waiving him outright is the other option if they don't see any upside for him. I believe there are less expensive Day Two OT in this draft who can fill Britt's role for the Pats, especially with LeVoir and O'Callaghan still under contract.
-- Alexander would have to be tendered at 2nd round tender (approx $1.5M) for there to be a return on him if another club were to sign him. That is too rich for me. I'd offer him a one year contract extension at NFL minimum with a very modest signing bonus or waive him to clear roster space for another young LB to develop.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Your opinion on Woods is your own. I don't happen to agree with it. Furthermore, they drafted an OLB in round 3 last season. Again, Bruschi is the weakest link among the starters. He's an ILB. Therefore, unless the team is going to move Thomas inside on a permanent basis, ILB is the more pressing need.



1.) I don't believe that I claimed that the OT would need a couple of years. I did note that he would have a couple of years. I prefer that players are able to work into a lineup at an acceptable pace rather than being forced into duty right way, especially with Brady coming back from his injury.

2.) I really don't care about your original claim, because I find it to be outside the scope of the question posed. Feel free to argue it with someone else, however. There are plenty of players that it might be worthwhile to trade up for almost every year. The question was, however, who you would trade up to #14 for. I've yet to see a single mock draft that has Curry fall that far, so why would I bother including him in the discussion?

yes, they did draft an OLB in round 3 and got nothing out of it......they also drafted an ILB in round 1...... not sure what they drafted last year has to do with anything

just like the title asks......who would you move up to 14 for? and I said curry and jenkins........did not ask who will be where.......

what you suggest with an OL is not something the pats have ever done......you may prefer it, but there is no tangible evidence that it is something the front office would consider

you should look in the mirror and recite your signature....and then say 'LALALALALALALA.....I DON'T HEAR YOU'

 

[CanadianPat'sFan]

Wow, agreement on the draft board? Unheard of!

For all the fretting about the LB corps -- and for all that I do want the Pats to add an impact linebacker -- I think they're actually in pretty good shape. Last year they reaped an incredible bumper crop of rookies, and this year looks very promising to find that one last guy to solidify the lineup, especially given the flexibility on where to place him.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on Everette Brown. I'm usually a little gun-shy on conversion projects so high, but Brown looks uncommonly dynamic and great with his hands and has shown steady improvement, unlike the all-physique prospects like Gholston. Plus his high-school TE clips suggest some nice agility and ball skills.

I really like Clint Sintim as I watched film on him last night. I remember looking at Chris Long last year and seeing this kid. I think he is going to rise at the combines and we should get him at 23 and not need to move up for some of these good LB (Currie, Brown, Maybin). No one is really talking about Orakpo...I was also watching some of his tape and WOW if this kid slid to 14 I would pull the trigger without a doubt. Thoughts on Orakpo??

 

[BradyManny]

IMO, it's all about AD. If he stays outside, SILB is the need. Move him to SILB and suddenly that position looks great with Mayo, Thomas, Guyton, Bruschi, and Alexander if you want him...and you're in the market for another OLB. So you can either:

A. decide first where you want AD, and draft accordingly;
B. let the draft come to you and take the best impact LB, inside or out.

To wrap this back around to the ostensible topic of the thread, let's assume B for a moment and ask whether there are any LBs of any stripe worth trading up for. At this early stage, I'd say Curry and Brown.

Or re-sign Woods and start him on OLB in the base 3-4.

To me, I am pretty firmly on this AD to SILB (for the base 3-4) bandwagon. He is much better against the run at the position than Bruschi and he is way better in coverage. It seems like such a no brainer on paper, that the fact that they didn't do it last year makes me wonder if they won't do it next year - if there is some reasoning we don't know about.

When it gets to the nickel and dime packages, AD can go back outside and do what he did last year - rush the passer, drop in coverage, spy RBs, basically anything the team asks him to do, b/c he can do it all.

Woods proved to be adequate to above average setting the edge at OLB, and also adequate dropping into coverage. The improvement from AD over Bruschi at SILB far outweighs the drop off by starting Woods at OLB in the base D.

 

[Deus Irae]

yes, they did draft an OLB in round 3 and got nothing out of it......they also drafted an ILB in round 1...... not sure what they drafted last year has to do with anything

just like the title asks......who would you move up to 14 for? and I said curry and jenkins........did not ask who will be where.......

what you suggest with an OL is not something the pats have ever done......you may prefer it, but there is no tangible evidence that it is something the front office would consider

you should look in the mirror and recite your signature....and then say 'LALALALALALALA.....I DON'T HEAR YOU'

They drafted an OLB in round 3 and you're already writing him off. I'm not doing that. Again, Bruschi is the weakest link, which makes ILB the higher priority.

As for the OT, you can keep on with the "they've never done" nonsense all you want. They'd never drafted a lineman in the first round until Mankins. They'd never drafted a linebacker in the first round until Mayo.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

They drafted an OLB in round 3 and you're already writing him off. I'm not doing that. Again, Bruschi is the weakest link, which makes ILB the higher priority.

As for the OT, you can keep on with the "they've never done" nonsense all you want. They'd never drafted a lineman in the first round until Mankins. They'd never drafted a linebacker in the first round until Mayo.

who's writing anyone off? simple fact is they have less sitting on the bench at OLB while the starters are 32 and 34.........crable may be able to play he may not........woods already showed he ain't much.....there's your weakest link

and they had never drafted a DE in the first round before seymour, and they never drafted a TE before graham and they never drafted an NT before wilfork and never drafted an OL before mankins and never drafted an RB before maroney and never drafted a DB before meriweather .......... that notion is absolutely pointless.........but they have always drafted for direct need, and not for something that may be a couple of years down the road.......but feel free to keep twisting to continue your weakest link

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Or re-sign Woods and start him on OLB in the base 3-4.

To me, I am pretty firmly on this AD to SILB (for the base 3-4) bandwagon. He is much better against the run at the position than Bruschi and he is way better in coverage. It seems like such a no brainer on paper, that the fact that they didn't do it last year makes me wonder if they won't do it next year - if there is some reasoning we don't know about.

When it gets to the nickel and dime packages, AD can go back outside and do what he did last year - rush the passer, drop in coverage, spy RBs, basically anything the team asks him to do, b/c he can do it all.

Woods proved to be adequate to above average setting the edge at OLB, and also adequate dropping into coverage. The improvement from AD over Bruschi at SILB far outweighs the drop off by starting Woods at OLB in the base D.

Why did Adalius stay outside and Bruschi start?

-- Woods was an unknown at the start of the season, as noted by the various articles commenting on how pleasantly surprised the Patriots were at his ability to play as an injury replacement for Adalius. There was no other option outside.
-- Bru may not have had all of Adalius' athleticism, but his instincts inside are some of the best in the NFL - so whom would you rather have alongside Mayo during his initial transition to the NFL?

Looking ahead:
-- Woods would seem to be able to come in and hold down a starting job at OLB.
-- Adalius' swing ability gives the Pats some freedom at LB in the draft.
-- Guyton has proven he can take 3rd ILB reps, we're just not confident he's ready for more.
-- Redd showed some ability to take limited 3rd OLB reps near the end of the season, whether that was desperation or because he had enough strength/3-4 experience coming into the NFL to move him up is anyone's guess.
-- My best guess on Crable is he'll be limited to STs and garbage time for at least another year.
-- There are a couple kids carrying late first grades for me who can probably come in and participate in the OLB rotation. I don't have any ILB kids carrying late first grades - Sintim I would like to work inside, but I'm drafting him as an OLB.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Why did Adalius stay outside and Bruschi start?

-- Woods was an unknown at the start of the season, as noted by the various articles commenting on how pleasantly surprised the Patriots were at his ability to play as an injury replacement for Adalius. There was no other option outside.
-- Bru may not have had all of Adalius' athleticism, but his instincts inside are some of the best in the NFL - so whom would you rather have alongside Mayo during his initial transition to the NFL?

Looking ahead:
-- Woods would seem to be able to come in and hold down a starting job at OLB.
-- Adalius' swing ability gives the Pats some freedom at LB in the draft.
-- Guyton has proven he can take 3rd ILB reps, we're just not confident he's ready for more.
-- Redd showed some ability to take limited 3rd OLB reps near the end of the season, whether that was desperation or because he had enough strength/3-4 experience coming into the NFL to move him up is anyone's guess.
-- My best guess on Crable is he'll be limited to STs and garbage time for at least another year.
-- There are a couple kids carrying late first grades for me who can probably come in and participate in the OLB rotation. I don't have any ILB kids carrying late first grades - Sintim I would like to work inside, but I'm drafting him as an OLB.

I didn't see it in woods........and I also believe there are cost-effective alternatives in FA (barton) as well as better value later in the draft (jasper brinkley)......put it this way, I feel a hell of alot better about guyton moving forward than I do about woods, and yeah, maybe crable and redd will get some plays, but again, given the age of the starters, the idea of any of the 3 holding down that job is scary (in a bad way)

the biggest stumbling block for this defense last year was the lack of a pass rush and that problem existed while thomas was still there....the pats got a total of 10 sacks from the OLB position...on '07 it was 23, in '06 it was 19m in '05 it was 19, in '04 it was 22, in '03 it was 19 and these numbers directly correlate with the total number of sacks as a team which also correlates to the level of success opposing teams had in passing the ball against the pats .......

 

[mgteich]

LINEBACKER
We have FOUR additions from last year's squad, not counting the Practice Squad players. Let's see what we have.

Thomas should move inside. If he doesn't then that means that Belichick thinks more of the current abilities of Bruschi and Guyton than we do. Guyton could be ready to start, with Bruschi as the backup.

Obviously, we could draft an OLB or an ILB for the future to take Redd's roster spot. But at 23 or in the 2nd, I wouldn't expect someone who would start this year. Even if they were better talents than Guyton, Crable and Woods, it will take time to learn the position. I would not be surprised to see no additions at linebacker.

OLB = Vrabel
OLB = Woods
OLB = Crable

ILB = Mayo
ILB = Thomas
ILB = Bruschi

LB = Guyton (he should get training camp time at all LB positions; and then able to fill in wherever needed)
LB = draftee/fa/Redd/Seau/Colvin
ST = Izzo is likely going to be on the team to play special teams (alternatives are Alexander and Redd)
===================================================

OFFENSIVE GUARD
We have a SEVERE need at guard.
Hochstein is a free agent.
Mankins and Neal are signed only through this season.
Neal has been often injured.
Yates is signed only through this season.

Yes, we also have a 2009 need at RT since Kaczur is in his contract year. However, we also have LeVoir and Callaghan. To project Kaczur as the guard to replace Neal in 2010 ignores the fact that Kaczur has no pro experience at guard, and he isn't signed for next year. There is no reason to worry about where Kaczur will fit in for the 2010 season. He is an adequate starter for 2009 (only posters disagree; Dante is fine with his play). And there is camp competition for his starting position.

Personally, if we need a RG, I think that we should draft a guard. Also, I would note that a guard is more valuable if he also plays center, and/or deep snaps. My choice, as it has been for a few weeks, is Unger as a first round pick. This presumes that we sign safeties and a corner in free agencies, which is almost a sure thing.

OLB = Vrabel
OLB = Thomas
OLB = Woods
OLB = Crable

ILB = Mayo
ILB = Guyton
ILB = Bruschi

Now, you can opine that Bruschi was not the weak link of the three veteran starters, and you can opine that Guyton showed he's ready to be a 3 down ILB in Bruschi's place. I believe that Bruschi was the weakest of the three, however, and I don't believe that Guyton's ready to be a 3 down player at ILB. That makes ILB more important to fill in this upcoming season, in my opinion.

As for the OT, what part of Neal's turning 33 this October and coming off of two straight seasons with games lost due to injury are you having the most difficulty grasping, and what part of "I think that Kaczur can be moved to guard" is too tough for you to read?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I didn't see it in woods........and I also believe there are cost-effective alternatives in FA (barton) as well as better value later in the draft (jasper brinkley)......put it this way, I feel a hell of alot better about guyton moving forward than I do about woods, and yeah, maybe crable and redd will get some plays, but again, given the age of the starters, the idea of any of the 3 holding down that job is scary (in a bad way)

the biggest stumbling block for this defense last year was the lack of a pass rush and that problem existed while thomas was still there....the pats got a total of 10 sacks from the OLB position...on '07 it was 23, in '06 it was 19m in '05 it was 19, in '04 it was 22, in '03 it was 19 and these numbers directly correlate with the total number of sacks as a team which also correlates to the level of success opposing teams had in passing the ball against the pats .......

-- Barton would be fine if BB wants to bring him in for the ILB rotation.
-- Brinkley is another Oscar Lua, there are a couple other late round kids who look to be better options (Francois [BC], Brown [UConn], Martin [VA Tech], I also want to look at Robinson [Alcorn State] & Michael Reed [Cent OK] Saturday in TX v Nation).
-- Woods did just fine, he started three games before his own injury forced the Pats to go sign Colvin to backstop Guyton - if he had done as poorly as you believe BB wouldn't have hesitated to bring Rosie or Junior back earlier.
-- I'll take a top pass rusher, as long as he can set the edge and play underneath zone - if not then someone like Sintim or Matthews who have some experience playing on the edge as 3-4 OLBs are the better prospects.
-- Transition projects like Barwin or English in the second would be nice to have for the competition currently ongoing with Crable, Redd, Robertson, and Craig.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

OFFENSIVE GUARD
We have a SEVERE need at guard.
Hochstein is a free agent.
Mankins and Neal are signed only through this season.
Neal has been often injured.
Yates is signed only through this season.

Yes, we also have a 2009 need at RT since Kaczur LeVoir and O'Callaghan is in his contract year. However, we also have LeVoir and Callaghan. Of course they could all be RFAs pending the CBA situation. To project Kaczur as the guard to replace Neal in 2010 ignores the fact that Kaczur has no pro experience at guard, and he isn't signed for next year. There is no reason to worry about where Kaczur will fit in for the 2010 season. He is an adequate starter for 2009 (only posters disagree; Dante is fine with his play). And there is camp competition for his starting position.

Guards aren't that hard to obtain, but I haven't looked ahead to 2010 for the depth of that draft class, this one is very good when you add in the Cs and Ts who could be moved to G. I expect BB to get at least one interior OL and one OT on Day Two.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

-- Barton would be fine if BB wants to bring him in for the ILB rotation.
-- Brinkley is another Oscar Lua, there are a couple other late round kids who look to be better options (Francois [BC], Brown [UConn], Martin [VA Tech], I also want to look at Robinson [Alcorn State] & Michael Reed [Cent OK] Saturday in TX v Nation).
-- Woods did just fine, he started three games before his own injury forced the Pats to go sign Colvin to backstop Guyton - if he had done as poorly as you believe BB wouldn't have hesitated to bring Rosie or Junior back earlier.
-- I'll take a top pass rusher, as long as he can set the edge and play underneath zone - if not then someone like Sintim or Matthews who have some experience playing on the edge as 3-4 OLBs are the better prospects.
-- Transition projects like Barwin or English in the second would be nice to have for the competition currently ongoing with Crable, Redd, Robertson, and Craig.

yeah, well.......I guess we just have a different definition of 'did just fine'

I'd be willing to bet that the pats spend big $$ on an OLB before the draft anyway.........its what they've done in the past (colvin, thomas) and suffice it to say, the position is in much worse shape now than prior to either of those signings

 

[Brettlax3434]

We should not trade up in the draft. This is one of the deepest drafts in recent memory. The more picks we have, the better.