Will Belichick Cut His First 4th Round Rookie Draftee?

[Brady6]

I have many times said that I don't know who will start at RG. Belichick has 3 weeks to decide. Personally, I would start Wendell at C and Connolly at RG. I still think that this is the best combination.

I understand that we gain with Connolly at center. However, I think that we lose more with Kline, Cannon or Devey at RG.

However, I HOPE that one the three is ready to take over at RG. I just don't see it.

Volin said he wanted to make Cannon a surprise cut, at that moment I decided Volin is the worst writer in the history of pro sports and should be fired immediately. Not sure how that is relevant to your post but you said Cannon’s name and it reminded me how much I think Volin sucks.

Any way back to your post, I would start Cannon at RG because he started 8 games last season at RT and played very well, so I see no reason to keep him on the bench and play an UDFA practice squad player or a rookie.

 

[mgteich]

Ah, so it is Volin's fault that Belichick isn't giving Cannon reps at RG.
Maybe, Game 3 will bring something different.

In any case, I simply don't believe that being a good backup RT means that the team should start Cannon at RG, and that he needs no extra reps at that position. It seems that you simply reject scar's ability to train linemen. Devey and Kline may indeed be a better option at RG, even if Cannon is a much better RT than they are.

Volin said he wanted to make Cannon a surprise cut, at that moment I decided Volin is the worst writer in the history of pro sports and should be fired immediately. Not sure how that is relevant to your post but you said Cannon’s name and it reminded me how much I think Volin sucks.

Any way back to your post, I would start Cannon at RG because he started 8 games last season at RT and played very well, so I see no reason to keep him on the bench and play an UDFA practice squad player or a rookie.

 

[Ring 6]

We know a player didn't "earn" his roster spot because of how the season plays out after he makes the roster? That seems like a very different claim: that players who don't make an impression by the end of their rookie years don't amount to much. (Even so, what about Shane Vereen with his 15 total yards rushing as a rookie? )

I don't think year-end results tell us why the players were kept on the roster to begin with. For instance, if Jamie Collins had gone on IR 10 games into his rookie season before he started getting significant snaps, he would have fit your criteria. I don't think that means he didn't "earn" or "deserve" his place on the roster and was only kept out of fear of the waiver wire. It just means he was a developmental prospect.

Well that's not really what I said. Players who show they belong in camp and are blocked from playing time obviously wouldn't be what we are talking about.
I thought the group of players who didn't look good enough in camp to make the team and did anyway due to hope of development would be easy to agree on

Perhaps this is just a topic that can't be discussed in a forum like this.

 

[mcmurtry86]

Volin said he wanted to make Cannon a surprise cut, at that moment I decided Volin is the worst writer in the history of pro sports and should be fired immediately. Not sure how that is relevant to your post but you said Cannon’s name and it reminded me how much I think Volin sucks.

Any way back to your post, I would start Cannon at RG because he started 8 games last season at RT and played very well, so I see no reason to keep him on the bench and play an UDFA practice squad player or a rookie.

We heard this last summer too "Cannon will be a G because Connolly sucks" or "Hey, let's save money by cutting Mankins and Cannon can play G" yet Cannon played little to no G last year. Even in camp reports, it seems he's working almost exclusively at OT.

I know people are down on Wendell and Connolly but suggesting Cannon as an improvement seems odd. If he were such a logical and obvious fit at G, you'd think the team would be running him out there instead of Devey, Barker, Kline and drafting Halapio.

Maybe he'll get some time at G, but there's been nothing to suggest the Pats seem him as an option as a starting RG.

 

[Brady6]

Ah, so it is Volin's fault that Belichick isn't giving Cannon reps at RG.
Maybe, Game 3 will bring something different.

In any case, I simply don't believe that being a good backup RT means that the team should start Cannon at RG, and that he needs no extra reps at that position. It seems that you simply reject scar's ability to train linemen. Devey and Kline may indeed be a better option at RG, even if Cannon is a much better RT than they are.

I don't think it matters as long as Cannon is getting reps. I think you drastically overemphasize the importance of an OL getting reps at a specific spot on the line. The reps are what is important to a player who is entering his fourth season. He understands the assignments.

 

[Brady6]

We heard this last summer too "Cannon will be a G because Connolly sucks" or "Hey, let's save money by cutting Mankins and Cannon can play G" yet Cannon played little to no G last year. Even in camp reports, it seems he's working almost exclusively at OT.

I know people are down on Wendell and Connolly but suggesting Cannon as an improvement seems odd. If he were such a logical and obvious fit at G, you'd think the team would be running him out there instead of Devey, Barker, Kline and drafting Halapio.

Maybe he'll get some time at G, but there's been nothing to suggest the Pats seem him as an option as a starting RG.

Have you been to practice because I have been to 4 and he has practiced at RG during 3 of them.

 

[mcmurtry86]

Have you been to practice because I have been to 4 and he has practiced at RG during 3 of them.

Yes I have an I have yet to see him get extensive work there. It seems more like the normal cross-training they do every year. I'm not saying Cannon will never play some RG. I'm saying that it doesn't seem like he's in the plans as a week 1 starter.

 

[Brady6]

Yes I have an I have yet to see him get extensive work there. It seems more like the normal cross-training they do every year. I'm not saying Cannon will never play some RG. I'm saying that it doesn't seem like he's in the plans as a week 1 starter.

I think they are giving people reps that they want to assess because they know what they have in Cannon. Just like they are using Butler at RCB with the first team. Do you think that will do that in the regular season because I don't. I don't even think Devey will make the 53 man roster.

This weeks game will be a good indication of what the plans are.

 

[mcmurtry86]

I think they are giving people reps that they want to assess because they know what they have in Cannon. Just like they are using Butler at RCB with the first team. Do you think that will do that in the regular season because I don't. I don't even think Devey will make the 53 man roster.

This weeks game will be a good indication of what the plans are.

Let me put it this way:

In 14 previous Belichick camps, there have been a lot of guys to start/play extensively in one position who never made the team or played sparingly. There have not been many guys to play infrequently at one position and then start week 1 (i.e. not an injury or performance replacement) at that position.

And why does everyone assume Cannon would be a better RG than Connolly? Simply because Connolly is mediocre and (probably) overpaid doesn't mean Cannon is any better.

 

[Brady6]

Let me put it this way:

In 14 previous Belichick camps, there have been a lot of guys to start/play extensively in one position who never made the team or played sparingly. There have not been many guys to play infrequently at one position and then start week 1 (i.e. not an injury or performance replacement) at that position.

And why does everyone assume Cannon would be a better RG than Connolly? Simply because Connolly is mediocre and (probably) overpaid doesn't mean Cannon is any better.

I would start Connolly at center. I am not sending him to the bench. I am sending Wendell to UFA.

 

[Deus Irae]

Let me put it this way:

In 14 previous Belichick camps, there have been a lot of guys to start/play extensively in one position who never made the team or played sparingly. There have not been many guys to play infrequently at one position and then start week 1 (i.e. not an injury or performance replacement) at that position.

And why does everyone assume Cannon would be a better RG than Connolly? Simply because Connolly is mediocre and (probably) overpaid doesn't mean Cannon is any better.

I think people are grading their perception of what Connolly/Cannon would be against Wendell/Connolly:

Wendell is not a starting caliber center
Connolly is not a starting caliber RG

Connolly was a starting caliber center (though possibly not much more than that)
Therefore, unless Cannon falls well short of being a starting caliber RG, it's advantage Connolly/Cannon



Personally, I just want the upgrades. I don't care who it takes to be those upgrades.

 

[VrabelJr]

I have many times said that I don't know who will start at RG. Belichick has 3 weeks to decide. Personally, I would start Wendell at C and Connolly at RG. I still think that this is the best combination.

I understand that we gain with Connolly at center. However, I think that we lose more with Kline, Cannon or Devey at RG.

However, I HOPE that one the three is ready to take over at RG. I just don't see it.

As sad as it is, I agree. I'm hoping Stork can show something in the next few weeks so we can roll with Stork at C and move Connolly to RG.

 

[mgteich]

That is the question before the house. If any of Cannon, Kline or Devey is CLOSE to being a starting quality RG, then we improve by having them start at RG and having Connolly start at center.

Wendell's contract is a contract for a backup. As soon as Stork is ready, Wendell should go. Maybe that's in 3 weeks, maybe 4 weeks into the season, maybe next year.

Therefore, unless Cannon falls well short of being a starting caliber RG, it's advantage Connolly/Cannon

 

[jmt57]

Well, wouldn't they be guys who did little in camp, and had very small roles in the season?
We are talking about the idea of keeping a guy solely for the future in fear of losing him to waiver claims. There seem to be a reasonable amount of examples of this, and I don't see any that worked out.
Crable, Price, Tate, McKenzie(IR), Ornberger come to mind off the top of my head.

Crable - Drafted 3.78 in 2008; released at end of training camp in 2010.
Granted he was then signed to the practice squad and promoted to the 53-man roster in 2010, so perhaps in hindsight the Pats should have simply waive/injured and reached an injury settlement in 2009.

Price - Drafted 3.90 in 2010; released Dec 3 2011
Pats should have given up after one season? Easy to say in hindsight, but considering his late start due to graduation class dates and when he could first start practicing, a little bit of leeway seems to have been warranted. If anything this seems to be an example of a short leash, and not the opposite.

Tate - Drafted 3.83 in 2009; released at end of camp in 2011
When the NFL moved the kickoff back, Tate's role became diminished and the Pats released him. In 2010 Tate did have 432 yards receiving and 3 TD, so he wan't completely unproductive, despite coming off a late season-ending injury that resulted in surgery.

McKenzie - Drafted 3.97 in 2010; released at end of camp in 2010
How much quicker than that should the Pats have cut ties with McKenzie? On the first day of rookie minicamp, when he blew out his knee?

Ohrnberger - Drafted 4.123 in 2009; released in February of 2012
Pats gave him three years, a case could be made in which that was one year too may.
On the other hand he has played 26 games in the last two seasons.


Overall I'm not seeing that these are very good examples of players being given too much time to develop. Push the needle too much to that side and you end up like the Dolphins or Chargers giving up on Welker, or the Jets giving up on Woodhead early in their careers - or, to go further back in franchise history, the Pats giving up on Steve McMichael, a third round draft pick from a generation ago.