Thinking outside the box....

[patfanken]

Its almost 2am, and maybe I'm just sleep deprived, but something that just popped into my head in another thread got me thinking and I'd like your opinion.

I think there should be one of 2 strategies ready for this draft, depending on how BB stacks his board. Now if has Watt, Jordan, Quinn, Smith, Kerrigan etc highly rated. lets say A full point ahead of Wilkerson, Heywood or Clayborn,etc for instance, We fully have the capability to move up and get the whomever BB has identified and STILL have 4 more picks in the first 3 rounds. How can we NOT do that.'....at least!

But this is the one I'd like some opinions on. Hypothetically we could trade the 17th, 28th, and 60th and get to the 4th position in the draft. That would be Cinci, who might be much more comfortable getting their QB at 17 than at 4, since they have so many other issues the 2 other premium picks would really help them.

Getting to 5 of course would be even less costly. The Cardinals are another team that need more than one pick to improve. They might be a candidate to trade up to for the 17th 33rd and 60th and a 6th to sweeten the pot.

Now at the 4th or 5 postion, as most mocks have gone, we would be in a prime position to pick up Patrick Peterson, one of the very few TRUE impact players in this draft. We also would at least be in the mix for Dareus and Miller the other 2 consensus impact players,

Here's my thought, how bad would it be to wind up with a TRUE, IMMEDIATE, impact player at 4 or 5 and another very "good" player at 33 or 28, then take the 2 third round picks, etc, etc and get a RB and WR, OLB, etc.

Think about it. The team with a 14-2 record picks in the top 5 of the first round and #1 in the 2nd. It would be like having a 2-14 record.

In that scenario we would INSTANTLY improve the defense. We could have TWO real shut down CB's. An Excellent CB in Boddin who you now could match up on other team's bigger receivers or receiving TEs. Plus now Butler could concentrate on developing as a slot CB without the pressure of covering the other team's top receivers.

With the 2nd pick(28 or 33 whatever we have left, and we get Watkins who will start immediately at RG. In the 3 round we take a flier on Bruce Carter/Greg Romeus, With the 2nd third rounder you grab your RB favorite. Vereen, the kid from OU, Toddman whomever BB has targeted. Then you still have 3 picks and the deepest FA talent pool in history to fill in the blanks,

I'm just asking WHY NOT? What's the downside. All I ever see in mocks is us winding up with double digit picks that reek of mediocrity. With just a slight upgrade in picks we put ourselves into play for pretty much all the players people have liked here this off season (Quinn, Watt, Cameron, Kerrigan, Smith)and STILL would have more picks in the first 3 rounds than anyone. If we go ALL out, we wind assure ourselves of winding up with one of the few real IMPACT players in the draft (Peterson, Miller, Dareus) and STILL have the first pick in round 2 and multiple picks in round 3, etc.

Am I a heretic? Am I crazy? or should I just go to bed and get some sleep? I;ll guess I'll find out in the morning.....late morning.

 

[manxman2601]

Like you, I'm a fan of trading up and getting an impact player, with the obvious proviso that BB feels there is value in trading up, ie would adding Peterson say be a bigger improvement for the team than the three players you'd miss out on by trading away the picks (or having an additional pick next year). However, the main drawbacks to this approach are fairly obvious:

1. You are putting a lot of eggs in one basket, a basket that could get injured in the first game of the season or could end up being a bust.

2. You are giving up the opportunity to trade back or trade in to next year. Let's say for example that the Chargers want to jump back into the first. Their two second rounders are almost the equivalent of our #28. By not trading up as you suggest, but trading down with the Chargers would leave us with four second rounders. The question you have to ask yourself, is which would you prefer: Patrick Peterson and Danny Watkins (your suggestion), or Cameron Jordan, Brooks Reed, Mikel Leshoure, Leonard Hankerson and Clint Boling?

How about an alternative mad proposal as a compromise? Agree a trade pre-draft with the Redskins for their #10. That would put us in place to comfortably get Watt, Jordan, Kerrigan, trade back down if for some reason they're not available or jump up to #4 from there if Marcel Dareus slips. The reason I think it might work is that the Redskins, minus their third and fourth rounders might accept a sellers discount early rather than risk not being able to get a trade down as the draft happens.

The nice thing about the Patriots draft position is that they are so well placed, it's almost impossible to conceive of a scenario where they end up having a bad draft.

 

[NewFeep]

Simply put: I likey!

 

[supafly]

I am not buying into the trading up high theory Ken, but that is just my opinion as you may be right.

I think the uncertainty of the rookie contract situation telling BB to pretty much do what he always does. If there was a definite rookie pool in place, then it may very well be a different story.

I think they will do what they always do, which is build next yr's draft as much as possible taking advantage of trade downs for extra picks. I also think that they will take some players who are rated highest on our board for our particular system, and take their chances with them. We always need to continue building, not only for now, but for the future. Trading up not only gives up picks, it also makes them take a chance at poor financial value--particularly in the top 10 picks.

There's always the chance that Belichick is just enamored with a particular player who is likely to go in the top 5--but even so, I really can't imagine him giving up all that would be needed, and taking such great risks that would come with that choice. Just doesn't seem his style, and the uncertainty of the labor situation and rookie pool are only playing into his conservative approach even more, at least in my opinion.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

"outside the box"

In a word, no.

1. Cost: Under what rules with the NFL be operating when/if the 2011 season begins? The few teams who have traded up into the top five in recent years have been desperate teams willing to pay the ruinous signing bonuses and salaries of those top draft slots. Regardless of how 'desperate' NE might be for one of those upper crust talents, the economics major in charge is more likely to view another dozen picks of perceived mediocrity and significantly reduced cost the better long term value to the club.

2. Why would Patrick Peterson be worth that kind of money to NE when they just paid Leigh Bodden top CB dollars and found an under the draftnikky community radar kid (from Rutgers of all places) to pair him with? Peterson's strength is in a pure man-to-man system such as Oakland's, not so much for a conceal and confuse system such as NE employs - this applies for CB or S. Amukamara later registers as a much better value and fit for NE's style of play, either outside or inside.

3. Miller might, arguably, be worth the excessive cost burden in picks and coin for such a move, but the "eggs in one basket" specter now comes into play as we contemplate the late Vernon Gholston's value for the NY Jest.

4. Your proposal downplays the potential of landing another Vollmer/McCourty/Edelman/Gronkowski/Hernandez/Chung/ in this draft class, let alone the possibility of NE cherry picking another startling 2010 class out of the culls. Sleep deprived you may be at the time of this post, it still must be remembered how Bill loves to read the labels when shopping - waiting for our feast may be a bit frustrating, but while desserts in recent years haven't been as satisfying as we might like, only the 2009 regular season served us hot dogs instead of pork loin ... and at that they had all the potential to transform into the world's greatest coneys if they'd played as a team instead of a drama club.

 

[PATSNUTme]

I'd go up for Miller if he drops below #5. This team needs a play maker on defense and Miller has the best chance of being that guy in a 3-4.

I'm not as concerned about OT as most. I think they will sign Light and he has a couple of good years left. ORG is the place that they need to go after on day 2. DL is also a place that they can add a player on day 2.

 

[bucky]

I'd go up for Miller if he drops below #5. This team needs a play maker on defense and Miller has the best chance of being that guy in a 3-4.

My thought exactly. Miller at 6 (17+28), Jordan/Watt at 10 (17+74+92), or Aldon Smith at 13 (17+74). Those are the only guys I'd trade up for and the highest I would go.

Peterson, IMO, is highly overrated. He's got skills as a press corner, but not so much in zone and off man. Dareus is a very safe choice to take in the top 5, but as far as "impact" goes, he's not worth the move up. Finally, AJ Green is very tempting if he slides out of the top 5. But I just don't think it's worth 2 #1s.

 

[CTHuskies]

I am not buying into the trading up high theory Ken, but that is just my opinion as you may be right.

I think the uncertainty of the rookie contract situation telling BB to pretty much do what he always does. If there was a definite rookie pool in place, then it may very well be a different story.

I think they will do what they always do, which is build next yr's draft as much as possible taking advantage of trade downs for extra picks. I also think that they will take some players who are rated highest on our board for our particular system, and take their chances with them. We always need to continue building, not only for now, but for the future. Trading up not only gives up picks, it also makes them take a chance at poor financial value--particularly in the top 10 picks.

There's always the chance that Belichick is just enamored with a particular player who is likely to go in the top 5--but even so, I really can't imagine him giving up all that would be needed, and taking such great risks that would come with that choice. Just doesn't seem his style, and the uncertainty of the labor situation and rookie pool are only playing into his conservative approach even more, at least in my opinion.

Very good analysis - spot on!

 

[patfanken]

"outside the box"

In a word, no.

1. Cost: Under what rules with the NFL be operating when/if the 2011 season begins? The few teams who have traded up into the top five in recent years have been desperate teams willing to pay the ruinous signing bonuses and salaries of those top draft slots. Regardless of how 'desperate' NE might be for one of those upper crust talents, the economics major in charge is more likely to view another dozen picks of perceived mediocrity and significantly reduced cost the better long term value to the club.

Box, the rookie salary cap is about the ONLY issue that BOTH sides are in agreement with. I am making the "wild" assumption that a new CBA will be in place at some point, and if it happens there WILL be a rookie salary cap in place.

2. Why would Patrick Peterson be worth that kind of money to NE when they just paid Leigh Bodden top CB dollars and found an under the draftnikky community radar kid (from Rutgers of all places) to pair him with? Peterson's strength is in a pure man-to-man system such as Oakland's, not so much for a conceal and confuse system such as NE employs - this applies for CB or S. Amukamara later registers as a much better value and fit for NE's style of play, either outside or inside.

Peterson's has the best CB skills in the draft combined with rare size for the position. Its not like he's never played a zone, or is incapable to learn. Besides, if he is just 85% the guy EVERYONE says he is, he will be an IMMEDIATE impact player. With 3 CBs with the size and skills of Boddin, McCourty, and Peterson, the defensive permutations that BB could devise only INCREASE in number. He clearly is NOT a one dimensional player

2ndly, elite CBs in this league are making in the $10MM range, Boddin will make less than half of that ($4.5MM), so your claim that Boddin is making "top CB dollars" is hyperbole.

3. Miller might, arguably, be worth the excessive cost burden in picks and coin for such a move, but the "eggs in one basket" specter now comes into play as we contemplate the late Vernon Gholston's value for the NY Jest.

Eggs in one basket????? That would imply I traded the Pats ALL the draft picks to move up? Are you so used to having double digit picks that having a mere 6 seems like having just one?

6 picks (as I saw it) also gave us a top quality OLman, a RB in the meat of the RB area of the draft, a high risk reward OLB prospect, and 2 other picks who might could make the team. And that's not to say we trade down a few slots at 33 and pick up an additional pick or two to satisfy the masses and wind up with the Alabama OT (Carpenter IIRC) A lot of people here are very high on him

.....and then you play the "Gholston card". I kind of expected someone to throw that one in. Patrick Peterson is NOTHING like Gholston, who had a number of mixed reviews prior to that draft. In fact more than a few guys here opined that they wouldn't touch him, and prayed that the Pats would stay away from him.

4. Your proposal downplays the potential of landing another Vollmer/McCourty/Edelman/Gronkowski/Hernandez/Chung/ in this draft class, let alone the possibility of NE cherry picking another startling 2010 class out of the culls. Sleep deprived you may be at the time of this post, it still must be remembered how Bill loves to read the labels when shopping - waiting for our feast may be a bit frustrating, but while desserts in recent years haven't been as satisfying as we might like, only the 2009 regular season served us hot dogs instead of pork loin ... and at that they had all the potential to transform into the world's greatest coneys if they'd played as a team instead of a drama club.

Again there are 5 other shots to get a Volmer/McCourty/Edelman/Gronkowski. Are you so afraid of BB's draft selection that you feel the need to have him get 2 draft picks for everyone the rest of the league gets. The Jests have had just 7 picks the last 2 years and in both those years were playing long after the Pats had been shut down (BTW - don't bother to shoot that point down, because I know the reply well )

Also by losing just ONE of the 6 picks in the first 3 rounds, the Pats can assure themselves of acquiring just about anyone of those 2nd tier players I mention, and STILL have more players in the first 3 rounds than anyone.

BOTTOM LINE - The Pats are an elite team with a VERY rare opportunity in this draft. They can do the same old same old and walk away with a large number of solid prospects....AGAIN;;;; and HOPE one of them turns out to be an impact playrt, or make a bold play for one who they are SURE will be one.....and STILL have several picks to fill their needs.

BTW- a couple of questions for you, Box.

1.Since you seem to be one of the pessimists about the CBA here, how would you feel if the Pats continue their trade down strategy and pick up a few 2012 picks?

2. Do you really think, if the Pats add 3 or 4 more picks to the 9 they have right now that 10 or more will make the roster?

3. With over 500 FAs set to be available when this all ends - What impact do you think it has on the draft process. You know, just as there are potential Edelman's and Pryor's in every draft, there are also potential Vrabels and Andruzzi's in FA as well. This year more than ever. Do we REALLY need to fill every need in the draft?

Thanks for your comments

 

[ctpatsfan77]

and at that they had all the potential to transform into the world's greatest coneys if they'd played as a team instead of a drama club.

To this day I blame Afailius and his bloated contract for that.

 

[patfanken]

I
There's always the chance that Belichick is just enamored with a particular player who is likely to go in the top 5--but even so, I really can't imagine him giving up all that would be needed, and taking such great risks that would come with that choice. Just doesn't seem his style, and the uncertainty of the labor situation and rookie pool are only playing into his conservative approach even more, at least in my opinion.

Again supa, the rookie wage scale is something BOTH sides already agree to, so if we are going to play football at all this year, the rookie wage scale is going to be part of the deal.

And what is "all that" he is losing 2 picks (3 for 1) if we go "all the way" or just one pick if we take the safer trade up route. Its not like we pull a Mike Ditka and trade them all

I've been solidly behind BB's trade down and rebuild a roster that is younger and faster. We've picked up 24 picks in the last 2 years, and added a few UDFA's who have stuck. Last year we had the young D in the league. Now you want to add ANOTHER dozen unproven players to a roster that has so few openings. Does that mean you want to ignore all the possibilities of the richest, deepest, and potential the most cost effect FA class in the history of the NFL?

I just don't understand those to seem to think that 6 or 7 draft picks in one year is woefully insufficient?

 

[patsfaninpa]

We did discuss this 4 days ago. My idea was to move to 7. I think SF would bite on both firsts. I see the top 6 going like this;

C. Newton
M. Dareus
V. Miller
AJ Green
B. Gabbert
Cleve - Julio Jones or R. Quinn. Don't need a cb

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...rick-peterson-cb-lsu-falls-7-sf-would-ya.html

 

[MaineMan]

Again supa, the rookie wage scale is something BOTH sides already agree to, so if we are going to play football at all this year, the rookie wage scale is going to be part of the deal.

And what is "all that" he is losing 2 picks (3 for 1) if we go "all the way" or just one pick if we take the safer trade up route. Its not like we pull a Mike Ditka and trade them all

I've been solidly behind BB's trade down and rebuild a roster that is younger and faster. We've picked up 24 picks in the last 2 years, and added a few UDFA's who have stuck. Last year we had the young D in the league. Now you want to add ANOTHER dozen unproven players to a roster that has so few openings. Does that mean you want to ignore all the possibilities of the richest, deepest, and potential the most cost effect FA class in the history of the NFL?

I just don't understand those to seem to think that 6 or 7 draft picks in one year is woefully insufficient?

Seems to me that some teams may have concerns about a potential overall salary cap for 2011, based on their current salary commitments while others won't (probably including the Pats), and those "concerned" teams may be adjusting their draft strategies accordingly. Whether a rookie wage scale has been informally/verbally agreed to or not, it isn't yet in writing and can't be counted on, so I doubt that any of these businessmen will approach this draft as if that's a "done deal." It might be difficult, then, to implement a rookie wage scale retroactively for this draft and much easier to implement it for a 2012 draft. So, saying that, "the rookie wage scale is going to be part of the deal" and apply to these picks seems like a huge leap to me.

WRT the number of potential new faces on the roster:
(1) it appears that we already easily have 12-15 potential (if not guaranteed) openings on the 80-man camp roster
(2) judging by history (well beyond just the past two seasons), it seems that adding a dozen or more new faces (draft picks, UDFA, whatever) to that camp roster would be "business as usual' not only for BB, but for every team in the league, pretty much every year, regardless of the state of their starters or the outcome of the previous season. Moreover, there typically seems to have been considerable "churn" at the bottom of that 80-man list during OTAs even before we get into camp.

So, IMHO, it would seem extremely unusual and probably unwise to add fewer than a dozen new faces, more or less, to the camp roster. Normally, our sources for those are draft picks, UDFAs and veteran UFAs from other teams. As of the moment, there's doesn't seem to be any guarantee that we'll have anything more than a shortened window to sign those vets. And many of the best from this year's crop of potential UDFAs seem likely to be signed by the UFL before we get a crack at them. Thus, as of right now, our ONLY source for those dozen or so new faces seems to be our draft picks.

I don't understand why this season/draft would somehow need to be radically different wrt roster-building. Seems to me that, if we're playing football at all in 2011, we'd still want to be able to select the best 53 (+8) from a full 80-man roster.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I'm okay with it so long as there's value in it. Knowing Cincy or Arizona would love to trade down and take their QB, they should provide some incentive. 17+28+60 might be similar on the draft value chart, but there's no way I'd consider that an equal deal. Maybe 17+60 plus a late-round pick. They get their QB, an extra 2nd, and we pick up a lot of value in the transaction.

I have no problem buying a higher pick so long as it's at a discount and there's a guy worth it available.

 

[mgteich]

This seems quite reasonable. I am not sure Alson Smith is worth 13.

My gut tells me that we might very well sit at 17 if we like Smith. It seems likely that one of Watt, Jordan and Smith will be there at 17.

I think that we will have opportunities to move up. I think that 17 is a reasonable spot for a quarterback in this draft. Of course, others think that four will be gone by 15.

My thought exactly. Miller at 6 (17+28), Jordan/Watt at 10 (17+74+92), or Aldon Smith at 13 (17+74). Those are the only guys I'd trade up for and the highest I would go.

Peterson, IMO, is highly overrated. He's got skills as a press corner, but not so much in zone and off man. Dareus is a very safe choice to take in the top 5, but as far as "impact" goes, he's not worth the move up. Finally, AJ Green is very tempting if he slides out of the top 5. But I just don't think it's worth 2 #1s.

 

[borg]

No way BB changes his stripes and all of a sudden lumps multiple premium picks to get "the" player. He has already made his move up in this draft, using capital from earlier drafts and trades. He creates value for future drafts by spending capital today. The value he has created in this draft was paid for last year...and two years ago. He clearly sees a team building advantage by increasing his available options.
Personally, since BB has been very talkative about being available to trade, I see multiple picks pushed into next year because he is either... comfortable with his 14-2 roster, sees a weak draft, or senses desperation on the part of needy teams......probably all the above. If he can squeeze a 2012 #1 from a terrible team, imagine holding the #1 pick in next years draft with Luck available.

 

[mgteich]

Yeah, imagine trading into 2012 and have two picks in the first round, or even three in the first 33. Then we could draft three studs and be set for five years.

BUT WAIT

No way BB changes his stripes and all of a sudden lumps multiple premium picks to get "the" player. He has already made his move up in this draft, using capital from earlier drafts and trades. He creates value for future drafts by spending capital today. The value he has created in this draft was paid for last year...and two years ago. He clearly sees a team building advantage by increasing his available options.
Personally, since BB has been very talkative about being available to trade, I see multiple picks pushed into next year because he is either... comfortable with his 14-2 roster, sees a weak draft, or senses desperation on the part of needy teams......probably all the above. If he can squeeze a 2012 #1 from a terrible team, imagine holding the #1 pick in next years draft with Luck available.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Box, the rookie salary cap is about the ONLY issue that BOTH sides are in agreement with. I am making the "wild" assumption that a new CBA will be in place at some point, and if it happens there WILL be a rookie salary cap in place.

Both sides agreed in their soundbites, I've yet to see good faith negotiations getting anything done. Until it's in place, I'm not banking on it.

Peterson's has the best CB skills in the draft combined with rare size for the position. Its not like he's never played a zone, or is incapable to learn. Besides, if he is just 85% the guy EVERYONE says he is, he will be an IMMEDIATE impact player. With 3 CBs with the size and skills of Boddin, McCourty, and Peterson, the defensive permutations that BB could devise only INCREASE in number. He clearly is NOT a one dimensional player

2ndly, elite CBs in this league are making in the $10MM range, Boddin will make less than half of that ($4.5MM), so your claim that Boddin is making "top CB dollars" is hyperbole.

Bodden is making top money by NE standards. Peterson may walk on water, but within my limited ability to judge CB play he's not worth a premium compared to Dowling or Carmichael much later.

Eggs in one basket????? That would imply I traded the Pats ALL the draft picks to move up? Are you so used to having double digit picks that having a mere 6 seems like having just one?

In a word, yes. Call me spoiled, but NE has proven diversification in the draft has it's value.

.....and then you play the "Gholston card". I kind of expected someone to throw that one in. Patrick Peterson is NOTHING like Gholston, who had a number of mixed reviews prior to that draft. In fact more than a few guys here opined that they wouldn't touch him, and prayed that the Pats would stay away from him.

He's a recent and highly visible horror story because "some" people did want him badly enough to pay a pick premium. Since my premium pick Chris Long is still in the NFL, I can at least rejoice in that and note I was a Mayo fan as best NE value. NE got Mayo, lost on Crable, and I think got part of another, plus whichever late round trade bait they didn't use - I still like what BB has been doing better.

The Jests have had just 7 picks the last 2 years and in both those years were playing long after the Pats had been shut down (BTW - don't bother to shoot that point down, because I know the reply well )

Meh, effing Jest; some standard of excellence you've chosen.

BOTTOM LINE - The Pats are an elite team with a VERY rare opportunity in this draft.

Bottom line - NE is a rebuilding team, it is not elite by any measure.

BTW- a couple of questions for you, Box.

1.Since you seem to be one of the pessimists about the CBA here, how would you feel if the Pats continue their trade down strategy and pick up a few 2012 picks?

Any 2012 picks need to pay a 2011 risk premium. For example: SF traded their 2008 1st to NE, plus their 2007 4th (#110) for #28 in the 2007 draft. The same trade this year: at least their 2011 3rd, preferably their 2011 2nd. If NE is taking the risk of there being a 2012 draft, then they need the pot sweetened because the risk is considerable.

2. Do you really think, if the Pats add 3 or 4 more picks to the 9 they have right now that 10 or more will make the roster?

Let's use your figure of 10 players. NE waives 5 of them at cutdown, what's the harm? That's improved competition at more roster slots than one (not to mention the improved PSquad competition) - and that one of the healthier slots on the roster with Arrington's improvement and Butler coming back competitively at the end of the season. Rather than have Peterson fighting for playing time with a proven veteran and a DROY candidate, let's get a Dowling or Carmicheal and give Butler and Arrington a run for their money, at the same time as we replace Light and add RB depth ... and still have those other six for OG, DL, S, ILB, WR, QB, etc. I've seen it work and I don't even have to go to the dog's backside Jest for my draft strategy.

3. With over 500 FAs set to be available when this all ends - What impact do you think it has on the draft process. You know, just as there are potential Edelman's and Pryor's in every draft, there are also potential Vrabels and Andruzzi's in FA as well. This year more than ever. Do we REALLY need to fill every need in the draft?

Why not? Those Free Agents will have zero time in the NE playbook to learn anything if things drag out until players starter feeling the lack of a game check. At least my 10 draft picks will likely be working with the NE team captains (see PFT today) and getting copies of the playbook to study.
-- I'd put good money any O-line drafted will receive a phone call from Koppen pointing them to some retired college O-line coach's academy for dancing bears and stampeding wildebeest that has the Scarnecchia seal of approval.
-- We've already seen Willie McGinest training linebackers, next thursday NE surprises the crap out of us drafting Ryan Kerrigan - do you want to bet against Mr. Kerrigan's agent providing him a ticket to the McGinest camp?
-- Mayo is working out near Gillette, any new ILBs could find themselves renting a room in N. Attelboro and stopping by Mayo's for some film study; and have you met my buddy Tedy from ESPN? He and I get together for film study now and again.
-- Wide receivers and tight ends report to the Los Angeles route running green, Coach Welker has arranged for a QB to help out.

I'll take the kids I know I can get my hands on and get into some form of player development and playbook prep over the veterans who will come in cold when the first game is played in October.

Thanks for your comments

Always a pleasure.

 

[MaineMan]

Both sides agreed in their soundbites, I've yet to see good faith negotiations getting anything done. Until it's in place, I'm not banking on it.

Bodden is making top money by NE standards. Peterson may walk on water, but within my limited ability to judge CB play he's not worth a premium compared to Dowling or Carmichael much later.

In a word, yes. Call me spoiled, but NE has proven diversification in the draft has it's value.

He's a recent and highly visible horror story because "some" people did want him badly enough to pay a pick premium. Since my premium pick Chris Long is still in the NFL, I can at least rejoice in that and note I was a Mayo fan as best NE value. NE got Mayo, lost on Crable, and I think got part of another, plus whichever late round trade bait they didn't use - I still like what BB has been doing better.

Meh, effing Jest; some standard of excellence you've chosen.

Bottom line - NE is a rebuilding team, it is not elite by any measure.

Any 2012 picks need to pay a 2011 risk premium. For example: SF traded their 2008 1st to NE, plus their 2007 4th (#110) for #28 in the 2007 draft. The same trade this year: at least their 2011 3rd, preferably their 2011 2nd. If NE is taking the risk of there being a 2012 draft, then they need the pot sweetened because the risk is considerable.

Let's use your figure of 10 players. NE waives 5 of them at cutdown, what's the harm? That's improved competition at more roster slots than one (not to mention the improved PSquad competition) - and that one of the healthier slots on the roster with Arrington's improvement and Butler coming back competitively at the end of the season. Rather than have Peterson fighting for playing time with a proven veteran and a DROY candidate, let's get a Dowling or Carmicheal and give Butler and Arrington a run for their money, at the same time as we replace Light and add RB depth ... and still have those other six for OG, DL, S, ILB, WR, QB, etc. I've seen it work and I don't even have to go to the dog's backside Jest for my draft strategy.

Why not? Those Free Agents will have zero time in the NE playbook to learn anything if things drag out until players starter feeling the lack of a game check. At least my 10 draft picks will likely be working with the NE team captains (see PFT today) and getting copies of the playbook to study.
-- I'd put good money any O-line drafted will receive a phone call from Koppen pointing them to some retired college O-line coach's academy for dancing bears and stampeding wildebeest that has the Scarnecchia seal of approval.
-- We've already seen Willie McGinest training linebackers, next thursday NE surprises the crap out of us drafting Ryan Kerrigan - do you want to bet against Mr. Kerrigan's agent providing him a ticket to the McGinest camp?
-- Mayo is working out near Gillette, any new ILBs could find themselves renting a room in N. Attelboro and stopping by Mayo's for some film study; and have you met my buddy Tedy from ESPN? He and I get together for film study now and again.
-- Wide receivers and tight ends report to the Los Angeles route running green, Coach Welker has arranged for a QB to help out.

I'll take the kids I know I can get my hands on and get into some form of player development and playbook prep over the veterans who will come in cold when the first game is played in October.

Always a pleasure.

From Reiss' interview with Mayo:

How much responsibility do you feel to keep everyone together because you're a captain?

“I don’t think it’s more responsibility, but at the same time, you have to keep everyone accountable. I know Vince [Wilfork] is calling guys, and I know Tom [Brady] is e-mailing guys and calling guys. Everybody is holding each other accountable. Right now, it’s what team can beat the lockout. It’s kind of 'you against the lockout.'"

If this lockout continues into July, there are very few teams that I'd expect to be as well prepared in spite of it as the Patriots.

 

[patfanken]

We did discuss this 4 days ago. My idea was to move to 7. I think SF would bite on both firsts. I see the top 6 going like this;

C. Newton
M. Dareus
V. Miller
AJ Green
B. Gabbert
Cleve - Julio Jones or R. Quinn. Don't need a cb

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...rick-peterson-cb-lsu-falls-7-sf-would-ya.html

Thanks for pointing that out. It was pretty sobering listening to all the varied opinions. I was surprised to see so many strongly held negative opinions followed immediately by someone who loves him Very interesting. So let me add the proviso, that BB would have to feel that Peterson is that "special" kind of CB he's want on the team.

BTW- Peterson wasn't the only guy I was thinking of when I dreamed up this scenario. Dareus and :Miller are also possibilities at that range of the draft. Dareus could be the guy in this draft who can really push the pocket from the inside. That's a very rare gift.