Draft Theory

[Ochmed Jones]

Higher
de, olb, ilb, ss

lower
qb, k, wr, te, cb

What about NT? Either starter and/or backup?

 

[mgteich]

I see no reason to adjust the rankings for this position. Wilfork is going nowhere next year. He will be our #1 priority, and will likely extend. In any extent, he can be franchised for a reasonable amount, even in a cap year.

It's been a couple of years since Belichick say fit to have a roster spot reserved for a backup NT. He had a spot for 4th rounder Kareen Brown (I think) which didn't work out very well. I don't see us drafting a NT. And last I heard, we had a starter.

I wouldn't have minded a veteran backup, but belichick hasn't signed one for awhile.

What about NT? Either starter and/or backup?

 

[patchick]

Need is not separate. BB drafts for value with need factored into each selection. I see no debate.

I think there's a debate because every year you see people -- here and elsewhere -- insist that the Patriots do NOT draft for need, they take a "disciplined" BPA approach. It's a persistent myth, right up there with "the Pats never draft any players they bring in for visits, cross them off your list." The clear statement about Dimitroff's philosophy seems like a useful nail in the myth's coffin.

 

[Seneschal2]

I think there's a debate because every year you see people -- here and elsewhere -- insist that the Patriots do NOT draft for need, they take a "disciplined" BPA approach. It's a persistent myth, right up there with "the Pats never draft any players they bring in for visits, cross them off your list." The clear statement about Dimitroff's philosophy seems like a useful nail in the myth's coffin.

Essentially making the Pats even more unpredictable than they already were. The myth - "BB & the Pats would never..." is being squashed.

 

[patchick]

Essentially making the Pats even more unpredictable than they already were. The myth - "BB & the Pats would never..." is being squashed.

Absolutely. Mayo killed one of the last sacred cows last year. And it wasn't so long ago that one of the most rock-solid rules was that interior OL are off the board early, it's better value to send day-2 kids through L'Accademia Dante.

Although...I suspect that this year's draft will revive some of the BPA legend. I've always said that the "Pats don't draft for need" idea was a misreading that grew out of the fact that they carefully fill needs before the draft. This year is the perfect example: Baker, Springs, Bodden, Galloway, Sanders, Wright & Taylor = no real holes in the 2009 lineup. Meanwhile only they know who they expect to keep for 2010, and how much they're expecting to get out of players like Crable, Guyton, Wheatley, Lewis and Redd this year. So even if their moves are need-driven, it will be hard for us to tell.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think there's a debate because every year you see people -- here and elsewhere -- insist that the Patriots do NOT draft for need, they take a "disciplined" BPA approach. It's a persistent myth, right up there with "the Pats never draft any players they bring in for visits, cross them off your list." The clear statement about Dimitroff's philosophy seems like a useful nail in the myth's coffin.

Correct me if my memory is wrong on this, but didn't BB once mention need as being part of the 'value' equation?