Burgess can be had for a 3rd and a 4th...

[BradyManny]

Moss is a far better player than Burgess and, as you pointed out, it was a 4th.

No doubt, but in hindsight, I could've given up a 1st for Moss and been OK with it, wouldn't have you? Sure, Burgess won't have a fraction of the impact. But we're talking about a key ingredient that MAY be the difference in a SB run.

 

[captain stone]

Re: Burgess can be had for a 3rd or 4th....

Haha, oh right. I was trying to think of who you were referring to but I was racking my brain thinking of Johnsons and not Teds.

Not all Johnsons look alike to me...not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Re: Burgess can be had for a 3rd or 4th....

I hear you - round 3 presents great value, and I agree the Pats 2 third round picks in 09 will likely end up as contributors. But we have to balance short term and long term goals. Outside of the health of Brady, Moss, AD, etc. and other key players, the only thing potentially stopping the Pats from another SB run would be pass rush.

While I think we can get pass rush from our DL and from AD, adding Burgess would allow AD to play a more flexible and versatile role in the D, and allow BB to throw more packages out there. I agree the price - in theory - is too high, but in the practical sense, considering our needs, I would pull the trigger.

I agree, there also has to be a balance of short-term and long-term goals. And if Burgess is the solution to another Superbowl, then the deal makes perfect sense.

I just don't see him being the solution though. If we traded for Burgess, would that resolve the pass rush problems? Or would it just add another question to the mix at OLB?

I would like to trade for him though. It's worth the risk for the reasons you mentioned. But I'm more comfortable gambling with a 4th or 5th round pick. With a 3rd, you could draft the next Derrick Burgess (who happened to be drafted in the 3rd round ).

 

[Pat_the_Patriot]

Re: Burgess can be had for a 3rd or 4th....

On the "Moss for a fourth" scale, this deal sucks.

hahahahahahahahahaha

 

[APatrioticVirginian]

Re: Burgess can be had for a 3rd or 4th....

Schefter twitters constantly day and night

 

[Deus Irae]

No doubt, but in hindsight, I could've given up a 1st for Moss and been OK with it, wouldn't have you? Sure, Burgess won't have a fraction of the impact. But we're talking about a key ingredient that MAY be the difference in a SB run.

I don't believe that Burgess is the key ingredient for a Super Bowl run.

 

[DW Toys]

Heck he is even contemplating retirement

So let's not just randomly pick hyped up players as examples of guys who they patriots should have picked when they have actually done zero in the league (See: Jarvis Moss, Michael Johnson).

I have no problem questioning the Patriots, but at least give us some good examples DW

rsd. I am just saying that Johnson will be a very good player IMO and has shown well in the Bengals camp. Moss is an unknown but perhaps a change of scenery? BB has a good scout or two in Shanny and Meyer. Johnson was beat up before the draft by the "experts", not hyped. He was originally thought to be a top ten selection.
I am not thrilled with any of our "roster" to fill the Vrabel role. Are you? Oh BB will plug someone in who will be mediocre at best. You might as well be mediocre with a young kid to let him learn, not a ST guy like Alexander and the new Ninny-whatsis guy, Woods or the oft injured Crabel.
I actually think Colvin is the better answer if you are going with this crew.
When your bringing in players like Sulak for a work out, don't tell me Moss isn't worth a look see with a low choice trade. I can actually see Brooks as an option to rush the passer better than these other guys.
DW toys

 

[Deus Irae]

rsd. I am just saying that Johnson will be a very good player IMO and has shown well in the Bengals camp. Moss is an unknown but perhaps a change of scenery? BB has a good scout or two in Shanny and Meyer. Johnson was beat up before the draft by the "experts", not hyped. He was originally thought to be a top ten selection.
I am not thrilled with any of our "roster" to fill the Vrabel role. Are you? Oh BB will plug someone in who will be mediocre at best. You might as well be mediocre with a young kid to let him learn, not a ST guy like Alexander and the new Ninny-whatsis guy, Woods or the oft injured Crabel.
I actually think Colvin is the better answer if you are going with this crew.
When your bringing in players like Sulak for a work out, don't tell me Moss isn't worth a look see with a low choice trade. I can actually see Brooks as an option to rush the passer better than these other guys.
DW toys

Moss was offered around the NFL for a 7th round pick in the draft, by a team switching to a 3-4 and having a lousy defense. Moss isn't worth looking at. If he was, he'd be fine in Denver.

 

[makoute]

No doubt, but in hindsight, I could've given up a 1st for Moss and been OK with it, wouldn't have you? Sure, Burgess won't have a fraction of the impact. But we're talking about a key ingredient that MAY be the difference in a SB run.

Honestly, I would at the time (huge Moss fan). That's the reason why I thought the pats would never get him, I never thought he'd be traded for a 4th rounder.

 

[DW Toys]

Moss was offered around the NFL for a 7th round pick in the draft, by a team switching to a 3-4 and having a lousy defense. Moss isn't worth looking at. If he was, he'd be fine in Denver.

I don't know if Moss can change his stripes but anything we have is no great shakes either. Perhaps you are right on him. I would take him over anything we have right now and work with him, to which we have two ST only players who could not cover me, a PUP forever guy and a very weak UDFA who might be a better back up and a former seventh round pick who failed to earn the big check he got in SF and might be a role player here.
We all can read the tea leaves (Ellis, Taylor etc now Burgess?). They are desperately seeking some OLB help. Can we agree there? They did NOT address that issue this offseason in fact, maybe made it worse.
DW Toys

 

[BradyManny]

I don't believe that Burgess is the key ingredient for a Super Bowl run.

Fair enough. I'm sure if the Pats FO feel the same way, they won't be making the trade. If they do think he's the missing ingredient, then I think a 3rd isn't unreasonable given the circumstances.

 

[Deus Irae]

Fair enough. I'm sure if the Pats FO feel the same way, they won't be making the trade. If they do think he's the missing ingredient, then I think a 3rd isn't unreasonable given the circumstances.

If Burgess was considered "the missing ingredient", he'd already be in New England in all likelihood. Instead, this team's been looking in the basement bin for another veteran OLB. It's part of the reason why I refuse to panic about the position. I'd expect that, if the Patriots were absolutely desperate for an upgrade, they'd have been tossing money and picks around to get the player they needed.

 

[Ice Cold Bruschi]

The guys numbers and games played have declined every year the last 3 years, I say a single 4th would be generous

 

[captain stone]

Re: Burgess can be had for a 3rd or 4th....

Schefter twitters constantly day and night...

...behind closed doors, I hope.

 

[BradyManny]

If Burgess was considered "the missing ingredient", he'd already be in New England in all likelihood. Instead, this team's been looking in the basement bin for another veteran OLB. It's part of the reason why I refuse to panic about the position. I'd expect that, if the Patriots were absolutely desperate for an upgrade, they'd have been tossing money and picks around to get the player they needed.

History wouldn't show that to be true, though (LB in 05, WR in 06, DB in 08). Belichick has proven he's willing to go into a season taking a calculated risk that a flier on a guy will pan out. He never compromises on what he sees as value, and he never mortgages the future for one season - even if it means going into thay season with some unknowns. His principles in this regard have helped the team be competitive year in and year our and made sure that the long term is always in focus - but it's also made us depend on Duane Starks, Monty Beisel, Chad Brown Reche Caldwell, Doug Gabriel & Deltha O'Neal, to name a few.

But I don't think this is the season to take such a risk. This team is just too good, but it hasn't won a SB in 5 seasons, it has to strike now. Again, I'm pretty OK with what we have at OLB considering all the other factors (strong DL, strong secondary), but adding a guy who had 35 sacks in 3 seasons ain't a bad thing either.

 

[Rob0729]

According to Raiderbeat.com (are they legit), the Raiders' demand for a 3rd and 4th are overstated:

Adam Schefter, soon to be with ESPN, posted an item on his Twitter on Sunday that said the Raiders are seeking a third- and fourth-round draft picks for Burgess. However, the Raiders official said the team realizes that they don’t have much leverage and are looking to dump Burgess for whatever they can get in return.

BURGESS, WALTER UPDATES Raider Beat

 

[BradyBranch39]

Re: Burgess can be had for a 3rd or 4th....

No way would I give up more than a 4th rounder.

OK, fine, maybe a 4th and a 7th.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Looks like the Pats will be able to get him at a bargain. I'd be shocked if the Pats didn't trade for him.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Looks like the Pats will be able to get him at a bargain. I'd be shocked if the Pats didn't trade for him.

As long as he holds out, his value in a trade declines as the Raiders are at a disadvantage. Who knows, maybe the Pats are gambling that Oakland will release him and they can pick him up for free........

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

As long as he holds out, his value in a trade declines as the Raiders are at a disadvantage. Who knows, maybe the Pats are gambling that Oakland will release him and they can pick him up for free........

Even better.