What's better, what's worse?

[bucky]

Come on, now. This is silly. Do you honestly feel we would be better off if we kept Baker and Smith, and hadn't drafted Gronk and Hernandez? You really wish we had those two back instead of the new guys?

Why is Seymour in the equation? He wasn't here last year, so how can we be worse off if he still isn't here? We did sign a couple Vet DL and drafted a couple rookie DL and Mryor and Brace are going into their sophomore years with a year under their belts. Would you rather cut all those guys and get Green back?

Since it's May and everything is still theoretical, I'm comparing the potential of this team to its counterpart 1 year ago - that would be May of 2009. That was when Baker signed a fairly big contract. In essence, we don't know that Crumpler will be better than Baker. And we don't know that Gronk/Hernandez will end up better than Watson/Thomas/Smith. Since this position turned out to be highly disappointing, we hope that it turns out better and there's a chance it will. But based on potential for the upcoming season, last year's TEs were better. This year's TEs are a huge variable - could be very good, could be very bad.

 

[Seneschal2]

It's clearly the most unsettled position on the roster.

Woods and Ninkovich both look like useful depth players, but I'm crossing my fingers for one of Cunningham and Crable to emerge and take significant playing time.

I'm sure that BB is hopeful that both of them will be healthy enough to compete for playing time, and I'm confident that one of them will make a difference. But it's also not very logical (for BB) to expect the pass rush to be improved because of a rookie and/or a twice injured Crable, therefore an alternate plan must be in place. I think we may be looking at a more aggressive and creative defense this season -- resulting in greater pressure. No matter how much on-paper talent exists in the secondary -- they're going to need some help. Having BB take the defensive reins is a start in the right direction.

To address the OP, based on the new additions, I see no position as worse. Let's all hope the injury bug is absent, so we can get everyone on the field to compete.

On D, some positions to highlight would be CB and ILB as much improved. When we think that both Butler and McCourty have starting ability, pairing them with Bodden gives NE quite a trio. Same can be said of McKenzie and Spikes paired with Mayo.

On offense, one of the top needs this off season was adding a reliable intermediate target for Brady. Holt can fill that void. The short zone was covered with Edelman, now we can add two TEs to that zone with Hernandez having the additional ability to stretch the field. It looks like a spread-the-ball-around-offense will be moving the chains this season. Look for Brady to develop his relationships during pre-season, as he'll only throw to those who are reliable.

All in all, no real serious areas of concern, although a glimpse of an edge rusher would be a welcome sight.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

I'll admit, this draft was so much better than last years draft(which I wasn't a fan of). With that said, I don't see this team going very far in 2010.

QB: no change
RB: okay at best, it's all up to Maroney to change this.
WR: The loss of Welker really hurts. Because Moss is older and Welker could be out until midseason, they're worse.
TE: They have the potential to be better. Watson had the speed but couldn't run routes, which is is reason why he stopped getting the ball. Also, Watson's legendary tipped ball trick got old in New England.
OL: Still needs upgrade at C and RG. I feel bad for New England RB's.

DE: The loss of Seymour hurts and really got exposed against Baltimore in the playoffs. I'm actually rooting for Pryor to take the spot vacated by Seymour.
DT: They re-signed Wilfork so they're looking pretty good. However, if Wilfork goes down.....
OLB: Handsdown, the worst group in the NFL. It would be nice if Crable and Cunningham can make a push for playing time, but I'm not counting on it. I'm preparing to see Banta-Cain and someone else at OLB.
MLB: Potentially could be better. The addition of Spikes allows Mayo to go back to a more natural position at WILB. In fact, this is the year where he needs to start making plays. Having Spikes start at ILB will allow Guyton to limit his duty to strictly coverage, where he is more effective.
CB: Potentially better than 2008-2009. McCourty is very athletic and Butler played decent as a rookie in 2009. These too draft picks could very well be the future of the Pats secondary. This is a make or break year for Wheatley (no pun intended). Wilhite is a #3 or #4 CB at best until he learns how to look for the football and stop getting behind WR's.
S: Should be better than last year if Chung can take over at SS. Merriweather is way out of position at SS and gets run over too much. McGowan and Sanders should be limited to backup duty.
K: One of the only positions they are fine at.
P: They're better by default considering what the Pats have had since the departure of Tom Tupa in 1998.

 

[patsfan-1982]

QB the Decision making sould be better, but i don't see brady haveing more then the 28 TD's and over 4000 yerd's as far as yerds and TD's QB is the same


RB the same or worst


WR holt, is not a 1000 yerd WR any more but he is a upgrade. but still with out welker, i can't call the WR's better or even the same


TE's sould be a big upgrade as far as dept goes and the 34 rec and 500 yerds from watson, and baker, should not be that hard to top.


OL should be better


NT the same or better ther is lot's of detp here.


DE the same or worst green is gone. and mike wright, had a Career year last year after 6 seasons in the NFL with 35 tackles and 5 sacks


ILB should be a lot better with mayo at 100% and spikes in the fold.


OLB if Cunningham, and crable, don't make a impact they are a lot worst at OLB right now


S i think they will be better


CB should be a lot better


ST should be better all the way around.

 

[Marqui]

OLB: Handsdown, the worst group in the NFL. It would be nice if Crable and Cunningham can make a push for playing time, but I'm not counting on it. I'm preparing to see Banta-Cain and someone else at OLB.

If Crable and Cunningham can't push for playing time, then they're busts, period. Cain Nink and Woods are completely useless on the field 90% of the time. You're terrible at football if you can't beat them out.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

horrible OLB's = no pass rush = either no playoffs or an early exit from the playoffs.......

 

[Marqui]

horrible OLB's = no pass rush = either no playoffs or an early exit from the playoffs.......

Yeah, basically..

 

[bucky]

horrible OLB's = no pass rush = either no playoffs or an early exit from the playoffs.......

Except if you look at last year's stats, the OLBs (including Burgess who was the edge rusher in all nickel packages) had 18.5 sacks. That's very close to the number of sacks in 2003 (19.5) , 2004 (21.5), 2005 (19), and 2006 (18.5). In 2007, they had 23, but that was partially due to the fact they didn't even have to play the run, being up by 20+ points in almost every game.

The difference is the sacks/pass rush that came from the rest of the team last year - no Seymour, Green had 1, Warren had 1, Wilfork 0. If you really think about that, it might turn out that OLB pass rush wasn't the main problem. The problem might be the pass rush from the DL. Or it could be poor coverage. Or a combination of all 3, really.

 

[Marqui]

Except if you look at last year's stats, the OLBs (including Burgess who was the edge rusher in all nickel packages) had 18.5 sacks. That's very close to the number of sacks in 2003 (19.5) , 2004 (21.5), 2005 (19), and 2006 (18.5). In 2007, they had 23, but that was partially due to the fact they didn't even have to play the run, being up by 20+ points in almost every game.

# of sacks does not always correlate to the amount of pass pressure being generated. When the OLBs in the Superbowl years weren't sacking the QB, they were consistently collapsing the pocket and getting excellent pass pressure. When the OLBs last year weren't sacking the QB, they were usually getting absolutely no pass pressure whatsoever. Huge difference.

 

[bucky]

# of sacks does not always correlate to the amount of pass pressure being generated. When the OLBs in the Superbowl years weren't sacking the QB, they were consistently collapsing the pocket and getting excellent pass pressure. When the OLBs last year weren't sacking the QB, they were usually getting absolutely no pass pressure whatsoever. Huge difference.

Well I generally agree with you on the significance of sacks as a stat. However, we don't have access to the other stats, so sacks is still the closest thing we have to evaluating the effectiveness of the pass rush. I think it's not a huge leap to assume that the % of sacks you get from your OLBs vs. your DL is similar to the % of pressure you get from the 2 positions. So my point was just to illustrate that the DL may have been a bigger problem than the OLBs in generating pressure. Could our OLBs be better? Absolutely and hopefully. But frankly, I don't think our DL has ever been worse at generating pressure up the middle. I'm not a big believer in the profootballfocus stats, especially their player "rating". But based on their play chart, Warren, Wilfork and Green had really bad seasons and generated very little pressure.

 

[JackBauer]

If Crable and Cunningham can't push for playing time, then they're busts, period. Cain Nink and Woods are completely useless on the field 90% of the time. You're terrible at football if you can't beat them out.

This is vastly overstated with respect to TBC.

As for Ninkovich, I'd like the see the body of evidence from which you're drawing this conclusion.

Either they feel confident about some of the younger guys on the roster, or they'll be supplementing this group through FA. If they don't, I agree, they probably won't be in great shape at the position.

 

[RayClay]

If Crable and Cunningham can't push for playing time, then they're busts, period.

Boy, that was quick. So who should we draft next year?

 

[Marqui]

This is vastly overstated with respect to TBC.

Eh, I stand behind that statement. I rewatched TBCs play closely from last year's games. Against any team other than the Bills, most of the time he's playing poorly and having no impact on the game. He can't set the edge and he's an average pass rusher at best against anything other than JAG OTs.

As for Ninkovich, I'd like the see the body of evidence from which you're drawing this conclusion.

Watch any game he's ever played in.

Either they feel confident about some of the younger guys on the roster, or they'll be supplementing this group through FA. If they don't, I agree, they probably won't be in great shape at the position.

Agreed.

 

[PowerRunRevival]

By the end of the season I predict (and hope) that Crable and Cunningham will have shown enough to start with TBC coming in to rush the passer.

I assume the season will start with TBC and a vet who has yet to sign with us starting at the olb spots.

 

[mgteich]

1) OUTSIDE LINEBACKER

I don't think that we disagree with reard the situation at OLB. Yes, we should cross our fingers and hope that Cunningham and Crable have significant reps, and thereby improve our OLB production.

And yes, we should bring in an OLB or two for camp.

And yes, we do want a competitive camp to give us the best options when the season starts.

2) With regard to knowns, as you say, there aren't many. Bant-Cain should be expected to have lots of reps rushing the paper, certainly for the first half of the year. The second "known" is that Banta-Cain and Cunningham are making the 53, barring major injuries. I also think it almost a lock Woods makes the team a s spwecial teamers and backup OLB. That still leave lots of competition for the other 2-3 roster psots.

3) I think that we SHOULD be expecting improvement from the LB "sludge" of last year. There SHOULD be improvemenrt at ILB. After all
A) Mayo is back (he was recovering from an inkury last year).
B) Guyton is back.
C) Either Spikes or McKenzie should be an improvement over Seau.

You got my point. Everybody, including Burgess or another vet pickup, has a chance of playing a lot, or hardly at all, or being cut. TBC rushing some is pretty likely, is all.

I'd rather have some early mistakes and a competitive training camp than the sludge that was our LB corps last year.

 

[emoney_33]

The Patriots tried Guyton at OLB in Seattle in 2008. He was horrible at setting the edge and he was moved back inside in favor of the freshly signed Colvin. I'm not saying he can't do it, but I don't think it's in his repertoire right now. They would have to devote the entire training camp to teaching Guyton the position and then making the decision whether to keep him there.

Guyton was significantly better in 2009 than in 2008 at ILB. His 2008 failure at OLB is not directly indicative of his potential ability to pick it up in 2010. That being said, OLB is probably the biggest question mark we have in May, but it will hopefully be much less of a question mark at the end of summer.

 

[emoney_33]

Eh, I stand behind that statement. I rewatched TBCs play closely from last year's games. Against any team other than the Bills, most of the time he's playing poorly and having no impact on the game. He can't set the edge and he's an average pass rusher at best against anything other than JAG OTs.

I'm going to have to question either your claim to have rewatched TBC closely or your ability to analyze TBC after rewatching him closely. TBC was a very solid OLB last year in all aspects of the position.

 

[signbabybrady]

I think MCcourty is one of our 2 best corners, Spikes is one of our 2 best ILBs, Cunningham is one of our 2 best OLBs, Gronko our best TE, Hernandez our best HBack.
Doesn't mean they will be PLAYING THE BEST at the start of the season but I don't see better football players at those positions.

I think MCcourty is one of our 2 best corners

The way I see it is Bodden is the top guy and Butler wasn't drafted much lower and has had a year to develope So I would say Butler is better. And IMO the only way you could say differently is if what you saw from Butler last year maked you think he will be worse than one would expect by his draft status. I think he flashed enough skill for me to think he will make a jump maybe you saw it differently??

Spikes is one of our 2 best ILBs

I was willing to say that maybe he is the best at his position

Cunningham is one of our 2 best OLBs

I think if you wanted you could call him one of the best pass rushers (Though TBC would be the best) but not OLB the kid hasn't played there at all yet (I know he said he dropped into coverage but I took that to mean a zone blitz type thing where an DE droppes into coverage and not that he stood up and covered as an OLB)

Gronko our best TE

Again I said he looks like the best at his position

Hernandez our best HBack.

Nice effort but IMO HBACK is a role player and if we want to go here than we would need to revisit the nickle argument


in the end I doubt we are too far off but I think you overstated yourself a little.

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Hard to believe the Pats won't be better than last year both on offense and defense.

NE certainly improved at tight end -- getting two great pass catchers who can each in their own way create mismatch headaches for opposing team defenses. We have Moss, complemented by Edelman (until Welker returns) who had yet to reveal himself last year, and Tate and Taylor Price (with possibly Buddy to keep them company on the PS). Our offensive line returns with sufficient depth. Running back group is servicable -- much depends on injuries or lack thereof for the group. And the QB -- remains one of the greats of the game.

On defense, NE strengthened its ILB group while adding Cunningham to the OLB. McKenzie and Crable are essentially redshirt rookies -- one of them may surprise. The DL has depth. Wilfork is a natural leader with the contract out of the way.

Question is how do the improved Pats stack up against others in the division -- two of whom have added big-name, big-contract FAs as well as drafted well. For the Pats much will depend on how improved the youngsters on the team are and whether a couple of them are willing to step up and show they are playmakers -- capable of making a difference.