Wilfork#75
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2010
- Messages
- 2,348
- Reaction score
- 859
The more I think about the defense strategy and how the game is evolving, I don't think the Pats are going to pick high on the defensive line. Unless of course there's a player available to take that just grades out higher than everyone else on their value board. There's always room for that guy.
In another thread in the main forum I calculated out defensive snaps from Reiss' data based on personnel groupings, and it came out as 2.3 DL, 3.9 LB, and 4.7 DB (and .1 rounding error). For at least the third year in a row the Pats spent most of their time in sub-packages and not their base 3-4 defense. And even when in three man lines, how many of those were penetration lines, with rush specialists like Pryor or Wright on the nose? Likely a sizable number.
I'd like to split the Patriots drafts into two groups, 2000-04 and 2006-10, with 2005 as the separator because no DL were drafted as it was a stacked position, plus it was the year the passing game began to be opened up as a "point of emphasis." (Though that draft class did produce UDFA Mike Wright).
2000-04
5 DL selected low: Jeff Marriott (161), David Nugent (201), Jarvis Green (126), Ethan Kelley (243), Dan Klecko (117)
4 DL selected high: Richard Seymour (6), Ty Warren (13), Vince Wilfork (21), Marquise Hill (63)
2006-10
6 DL selected low: Le Kevin Smith (206), Kareem Brown (127), Myron Pryor (207), Darryl Richard (234), Brandon Deaderick (247), Kade Weston (248)
1 DL selected high: Ron Brace (40)
The above of course does not include UDFAs like Mike Wright (2005) and Kyle Love (2010).
So I think what we're looking at is a de-emphasis of the DL position (and a corresponding emphasis on secondary players). Apart from Mayo, the front 7 players are shuttled on and off to fit the situation. The secondary players are not only the most numerous part of our primary defense, they are also the only static part of the defense from package to package, so they give you the most value. The front seven has two freaks in Vince Wilfork and Jerod Mayo who hardly/never come off the field, but everyone else is a specialist.
The Pats going into next year have a bunch of high picks penciled into that secondary, along with a few skilled veterans (Sanders, Bodden) that are in no danger of being cut. You have a good young ILB rotation taking shape. DL, as discussed, isn't a draft priority any more, and they've got a bevy of people there returning from injury anyway.
So I think next year the position that would give the Pats the most value to upgrade is OLB. TBC, our vet OLB, played 67% of the defensive snaps. Ninkovich and Cunningham each played close to 50% of the snaps. Every DL except Wilfork played fewer snaps than those three. One of Moore, TBC or Ninkovich could probably be upgraded in the long-term by another Cunningham-type player with the ability to rush from a three-point and stand up as an OLB. I think Ninkovich will probably stay as he is a standout special teamer and the youngest of the three. Moore doesn't seem to be a stand-up linebacker and TBC might be slowing down.
I have no idea if there's any good OLB candidates in this upcoming draft, but it's probably the position on defense the war room will be most interested in going into the draft.
I agree with this. The Pats defence is continually evolving and I believe the emphasis for the DL will be on depth and versatility rather than just having 3 studs. As unoriginal pointed out The Pats spend the majority of their snaps in sub packages and continually rotate personnel and give the offence as many different looks as they can. I believe this decreases the value of a stud DE as they wont be on the field for a large amount of snaps. I do believe that a backup NT is a need for this defence in order to give Wilfork a rest and give the DL an extra dimension, especailly if they do give Wilfork some snaps at DE.
Part of the reason I wouldnt draft a DE in the first round is becuase with so many teams moving to the 3-4 in recent years, the value for 5-techs has gone up. You can see from Tyson Jackson going #3 to KC that they have become overvalued and teams are reaching for them. Because of this I dont think that there will be a DE that offers good value for the Pats in the first round. Dont get me wrong though, if BB see's the next Richard Seymour who offers value in the first round, I would absolutely support him taking them, but I just dont see that guy. There are a lot of talented DE in the draft but I just dont see any of them as the 'right fit' for the Pats. Because of this I would spend a high pick on a guy that im not sure about, especailly with the evolution of the defence. I would prefer to do what the Pats have done in recent years and draft the prototype DL in the later rounds like Deaderick and Weston, and coach them up. The current DL is very solid so there is no need to rush the development of the DL.