Thinking outside the box....

[patfanken]

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.

Well its not a great leap for me. I'd say there is about the same chance of the rookie wage scale NOT being included in a new deal, as there is a chance that this will be the last draft in NFL history. Both are statistically possible, but I wouldn't put a bet on it.

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

That's were we see it differently - Its not about the 80 man camp roster, its all about the 53 man FINAL roster. If we have a similar draft strategy as the last 2 years, what good will it to to draft 10-12 new players when it is likely only 5 or 6 make the team.

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.

Right now the UFL is a 5 team league. They could fill their entire rosters with NFL quality players and not make a significant dent in the NFL game

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.

The difference is the need to find IMPACT players. And while you can certainly find them all through the draft, they are consistently and statistically found more often at the top of the first round than in any other place. Sure there are notable busts, that's the risk. But its less of a risk (statistically than in other parts of the draft.

BB has stocked his team with plenty of the "middle class" and will at 5 or 6 more to that caste this season. However what is missing is finding that special playmaker. Think what a boost McCorty's big play making gave us in the 2nd half of last season. And sure we my find that guy in the low 20's again, HOWEVER......we are more LIKELY to find in the single digits.

 

[patsfaninpa]

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.

I agree with you about Peterson. Time will tell. I don't think it's always best to look back and build what you had that used to work. The game is changing. You can't even hit a damn qb any more. Pass-rushers have to back off practically. Teams spread you out and make you play in space. We certainly do. I'd rather have a cb like Peterson who can cover. Than a decent dl(who can be blocked) and an ol. Fight the next war. Not the last one.

 

[patfanken]

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.

Your lips to God's ear, MG, but I don''t see any of those guy lasting to 17. I hope you are right. In an Ideal world Watt Jordan Smith Quinn, Kerrigan Wilkerson, Houston, Clayborn, and Reed, will all be available when the Pats pick because I just want to see which one BB Thinks has the most value.

 

[patfanken]

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.

OK, but if there is going to be an agreement, and it includes a draft, it will definitely include a rookie wage scale. How could it not when both side want 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.

That's a value judgment that I won't argue with. There are a few others who feel as you do, and I expect it. BTW - I focus on Peterson was so much about want the player, but wanting a player who seems to have such a universal consensus that he is an impact player. It could be Dareus or Miller. Perhaps NONE of these guys are flawless. Maybe in a nother year they be late first rounders. What I want is for Bill to pick THE guy who he covets and not just settle for the best player available when its his turn.

All the value he has amassed from other drafts allows him to more safely make those moves without losing the usual depth of the player procurement process. He has the assets, and if they guy is out there, I want him to spend them.

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

Well I am too, but like I said previously he doesn't have to spend them all, just what it takes to get "that guy".

I know that whomever he takes, where ever he takes them its a long shot he gets "that guy" I read somewhere where that over a recent period of time 40 DEs have been taken in the first round and only 5 of them had double digit sacks last year. And only 11 have EVER had a double digit sack year.

Successfully rushing the passer on a consistent basis is a VERY rare talent. Especially when you think that the best pass rushers rush the QB now conservatively 400 times a season, and if they catch him just 10 times or hit him 30 times, he'll be an all pro. That's a success rate of about one in hundred, Pretty amazing when you think about it. A one percent success rate makes you one of the best.

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.

Yes there were SOME people who would have paid a price to get him, but there were just as many if not more who were dead set against the pick. The point is that it was far from the universal acceptance that guys like Dareus, Peterson, and Miller have garnered.

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

No I agree totally. I much rather use our draft strategy that what the Jets have done. Clearly it will do a better job of sustaining a high level of competitiveness. No the Jets have been built for the short run. I can easily see the wheels start to come off soon. As early as this season.

It only goes to show I'm not above using an example I don't truly believe in....if it helps support the point I'm trying to make

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

Sorry, I know we like to underplay the quality of our team (the overachievers and all that) but you don't get to 14-2 against THAT kind of schedule, without being an elite team in the NFL. Are we a team that has flaws.....Clearly we do, just as every team has them. But lets not minimize what we DO have.

The point I wanted to make is that we have added 24 draft picks in the last 2 years, of which 18 are still with the team, What is the purpose adding another dozen more picks expecting 10 will make the team. It simply won't happen. Don't waste those picks on players who might be worth the value where they taken, but will never make the team. Trade them in 2012 if you must. Use the to move up. But don't keep moving down so you wind up with the most players from the 3rd day of the draft.

Any 2012 picks need to pay a 2011 risk premium. For exampleers : 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.

That seems about right

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.

The harm is what you MIGHT have done with those 5 or six picks that could have added to your team. You could use them to, again, select players you have targeted as opposed to "settling" for what's there. Some teams need a lot of new bodies, at THIS juncture the Pats don't.....IMHO

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.

,

This is a fair point in this strange off season, but on the other hand, BB probably knows RIGHT NOW, who he'd like to add to his team. And because he doesn't have to "Project" how they will play, they will be much more ready to adapt to the NE system. These will all be guys who BB has seen on tape vs NFL competition, playing NFL defenses and using NFL techniques. These will all be guys who know what it takes to get through an NFL season and Know how to prepare for one.

BOTTOM LINE: I don't disagree with your premise, I just see from a different point of view.

I

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

OK, but if there is going to be an agreement, and it includes a draft, it will definitely include a rookie wage scale. How could it not when both side want it.

Again, when does it take effect? If NE drafted one of your top three at #5, do they get him at the rookie wage scale discount of the old CBA price? Neither of us can say which, in that case, pinch the pennies and use the largess elsewhere to improve competition.

Sorry, I know we like to underplay the quality of our team (the overachievers and all that) but you don't get to 14-2 against THAT kind of schedule, without being an elite team in the NFL. Are we a team that has flaws.....Clearly we do, just as every team has them. But lets not minimize what we DO have.

Sorry right back at you. NE is currently rebuilding the O-line, the D-line, they have very young ILBs, they have one 9 year veteran OLB and a bunch of newbs, CB is always turning over, S has one stable veteran and a bunch of newbs, WR has two veterans and a bunch of kids, RB is rebuilding, TE was just rebuilt and needs to look to depth, and reserve QB is always rotating. That's CB, TE, and ILB recently rebuilt, S and OLB a work in progress, DL, RB, and OL in flux, Special Teams coverage is always rebuilding, and reserve QB ... all before fleshing out the practice squad. Elite? No. Maybe when they get back to the AFCC and win it.

The point I wanted to make is that we have added 24 draft picks in the last 2 years, of which 18 are still with the team, What is the purpose adding another dozen more picks expecting 10 will make the team. It simply won't happen.

I disagree. Between injury and turning over the back end of the roster and the practice squad, this team could absorb another 10 kids easily, factor in the UDFAs they go after every year, they will have close to 16-18 kids trying to win a camp roster slot, and a battle royal to steal away Slater or Lockett or Brown or Fletcher or Austin or Maneri or Turner or Farnham, etc.'s slot.

 

[Belichick's Midget Army]

I wouldn't trade up higher than Dallas, and I don't think there are many chances to do that either. Cincy won't look for a QB, and if they trade down to #17 (either them or Arizona) they risk losing Gabbert to Washington, Tennessee or Minnesota.

I think the top premium players BB should be keeping an eye on are Robert Quinn (if he drops before Tennessee), JJ Watt (if he drops to Washington) and perhaps Prince Amakumara (if he drops to Dallas). The rest, you risk overpaying somebody unnecessarily. Those seems like players that WOULD make an impact on the team fast, like Seymour did, and be more cost effective than, say, Von Miller or Patrick Peterson in the Top 5.

 

[DaBruinz]

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.

I wasn't impressed with Miller in the Senior Bowl. He was pretty much invisible most of the game..

Miller seems like a read and read after the fact guy who relies on his athleticism more than an instinctual guy who can truly read offenses and make an impact.

 

[MaineMan]

Well its not a great leap for me. I'd say there is about the same chance of the rookie wage scale NOT being included in a new deal, as there is a chance that this will be the last draft in NFL history. Both are statistically possible, but I wouldn't put a bet on it.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying that there will NOT be a rookie wage scale included in a new CBA. I was saying that there's a significant chance that it wouldn't be implemented retroactively to apply to the 2011 draft after the fact.

That's were we see it differently - Its not about the 80 man camp roster, its all about the 53 man FINAL roster. If we have a similar draft strategy as the last 2 years, what good will it to to draft 10-12 new players when it is likely only 5 or 6 make the team.

Actually, perhaps where we see it differently is that "only 5-6" guys making the 53-man out of 10-12 new faces seems pretty standard to me, whereas it's apparently unusual to you?

Right now the UFL is a 5 team league. They could fill their entire rosters with NFL quality players and not make a significant dent in the NFL game.

I thought I made it fairly clear that I wasn't referring to "NFL quality players" in general, just the better UDFA's from THIS prospect class. What this means is that there may be about 50-70 (possibly a few more) UDFAs each year who end up staying on with an NFL team or practice squad. With NFL teams having no ability to sign those guys, the "best" of that limited set (maybe half?) might sign with a UFL team. So that appears to work out to only around 6 guys per UFL roster. No big deal, except that the 30 or so guys who may get snagged by the UFL might include players like Ivory, Blount, Welker, Mike Wright, etc.

The difference is the need to find IMPACT players. And while you can certainly find them (impact players) all through the draft, they are consistently and statistically found more often at the top of the first round than in any other place. Sure there are notable busts, that's the risk. But its less of a risk (statistically than in other parts of the draft.

BB has stocked his team with plenty of the "middle class" and will at 5 or 6 more to that caste this season. However what is missing is finding that special playmaker. Think what a boost McCorty's big play making gave us in the 2nd half of last season. And sure we my find that guy in the low 20's again, HOWEVER......we are more LIKELY to find in the single digits.

Sorry, I'm just not buying this common and misleading generalization of "statistical averages" as applying to the Patriots in any particular draft. Simply because other teams have found "impact players" at QB, WR, RB, CB, 4-3 DT and 4-3 DE "in the single digits" in past drafts does not equate to the Pats being "more likely" to do so in THIS draft, nor does it equate to the Pats being unable to find the "impact" player they need outside the "single digits." BB appears to have done just fine in the past without trading up into the single digits. I mean, if you want to cite "historical odds."

 

[Metaphors]

Dareus is an ideal fit for the Pats and is the only guy in the top 10 that would tempt me to trade #17 and #28 to get to #5/6 in the unlikely event he slipped that far. I think Quinn will be a player but a little too risky for the price it would take. Really like both Peterson and Amukamara but can't justify it with Bodden and McCourty already on board (and I haven't given up on Butler yet). Fairley and Miller are poor scheme fits and the risk/reward on Bowers doesn't work for me.

That leaves Jordan, A.Smith, T.Smith and Watt (in that order IMO) as targets for #17. I am totally on board to moving up to #11-#14 to get one of them. If the Pats stick at #17, I expect SD and others to trade ahead of the Pats to scoop up those players.

My ideal scenario is for the Pats to move up for Jordan (hoping #13 will be enough) and get Carimi/Sheard by leveraging #28 and #33...up a little for Carimi and down a little for Sheard. Replace those names with your favorites but it seems clear to me that trading up to ensure they get targeted players should be the plan for this draft. This year is a perfect storm of deep/young roster, top-heavy draft class and the draft assets to do pretty much whatever they want.

 

[Off The Grid]

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.

Yes, indeed.

There seems to be an overwhelmingly prominent misconception about just how much room there really is, both on the Final 53 ~ or more, as may well be the case, this year ~ and on the 80 man Camp roster.

 

[Off The Grid]

By the way, "OutSide the Box" is the LAST term I would use to describe the notion of packaging an whole pile of Picks to Trade Up.

It's a very conventional suggestion around these parts.

 

[VJCPatriot]

By the way, "OutSide the Box" is the LAST term I would use to describe the notion of packaging an whole pile of Picks to Trade Up.

It's a very conventional suggestion around these parts.

Conventonal for some. But unwise to others. Year after year we see teams trading up and getting burned by busts. And yes Vernon Gholston is one of those cautionary tales that bear repeating.

Gholston's scouting report]Vernon Gholston Scouting Report - 2008 NFL Draft Prospect:
"Vernon Gholston is quickly becoming a force to be reckoned with. Gholston started all 12 regular season games at DE for the Ohio State for the second straight year. The fourth year junior finished with 15.5 tackles for loss this season, 14 of them sacks. The 6'4", 264 lbs. Buckeye is practically a fixture in opposing backfields the last two seasons. In November, he could be seen abusing the vaunted Michigan O-Line for 3 sacks and was the only man to beat Jake Long for a sack this season."

Gholston looked like a 'can't-miss-prospect' and the Jets took the bait. What did they give up in the process to get a guy who has produced ZERO sacks his entire NFL career and who was recently cut loose? A cap killing 5 year/40m dollar deal for an unproven rookie in 2008. Expect those numbers to be even higher for 2011.

"The New York Jets have reached a five-year contract agreement with first-round draft pick Vernon Gholston that includes $21 million in guarantees, culminating negotiations that continued into the early morning hours.

The linebacker's deal could max out at $50 million if he reaches all of his performance clauses. If the No. 6 pick does not, the deal would still be worth $32.5 million." Source: Gholston's contract with Jets includes $21M in guaranteed money - NFL - ESPN

The Jets crippled their salary cap for 3 years and gave up over $21m in guaranteed money that they'll never get back. They also had to wates one of their precious 53 man roster slots each of those seasons on a guy who would never produce. The Jets didn't just lose money they tied up valuable resources in the hope that the 'switch' would eventually turn on for their big investment.

Oh and who is being touted this year, isn't it Von Miller in the top 3 or 5? What do scouts say about him?

One said:
"Positives: Extremely disruptive pass rusher, is great at collapsing the pocket and forcing quarterbacks to step into pressure, forcing bad decisions... Has a high motor, is asked to blitz constantly and does not stop pursuing the quarterback until the ball is downfield... Can deliver crushing blows to opposing quarterback if he takes the right angle, tackles through opponents and does not stop at first contact... Very good at wrap-up tackling, begins many tackles at hip level and then maintains force while wrapping legs of ball carrier... Incredible production, had 27 sacks in the last two seasons.."

But another said:
“[Miller's] got some Vernon Gholston in him,” former NFL scout Dave Razzano told Matt Maiocco of CSNBayArea.com.

Razzano spent two decades as an NFL Scout. His opinion differs sharply from those who see Miller as one of the safer picks in the draft.

“I’m not a big Von Miller fan,” Razzano said. “In looking at Big-12 tape, he does not have a motor. He doesn’t chase hard. They run at him, and he doesn’t fight off blockers. When he gets sacks, a lot of times he’s not getting blocked. He’s a one-move guy.”

FYI the proposed rookie salary cap. Even if one is agreed to, there's no way it will be applied retroactively to the 2011 draft because this draft was held under the old CBA. And every qualifed agent out there is a lawyer. How do you think the NFL fancies 32 lawsuits in the 1st round alone? So a 'rookie cap' is NOT gonna happen till 2012 at the earliest even if AGREED upon.

People here are also proposing trading THREE picks for ONE for the privilege of drafting a possible bust. The higher up you go, the riskier you get because the more you can lose. Whereas if you draft THREE players, maybe some of them bust out but you have a chance of at least 1 or 2 of them working out well for you. And chances are the finacials for 3 players taken at picks 17, 28, and 60 will be less overall than the player taken at pick #5. That's how crazy rookie salaries have gotten. The 2008 Gholston contract is probably puny compared to what a rookie drafted at #6 or higher will command in 2011.

In other words, I am VEHEMENTLY on the verge of ALLERGICALLY against trading up multiple valuable resources on what by definition is a risk. The draft is a crapshoot. The only senisble way to hedge against the inevitable busts, and every gambler thinks they are proof against this, like the people saying the Pats scouting is SO GREAT, they could never MESS UP A PICK!, say hello to Laurence Maroney and Chad Jackon for me, well I have news, IT HAPPENS!

So let's try to keep our expectations reasonable instead of dreaming up these pie in the sky fantasies. That impact player might not be the guy drafted at #1, #5, or even #17. The All-Pro waiting to happen instant impact guy might be waiting right there at 28 for a patient, smart, and shrewd draft manager to scoop up and plug into his starting lineup, Devin McCourty says HI!

 

[patfanken]

In other words, I am VEHEMENTLY on the verge of ALLERGICALLY against trading up multiple valuable resources on what by definition is a risk. The draft is a crapshoot. The only senisble way to hedge against the inevitable busts, and every gambler thinks they are proof against this, like the people saying the Pats scouting is SO GREAT, they could never MESS UP A PICK!, say hello to Laurence Maroney and Chad Jackon for me, well I have news, IT HAPPENS!

So let's try to keep our expectations reasonable instead of dreaming up these pie in the sky fantasies. That impact player might not be the guy drafted at #1, #5, or even #17. The All-Pro waiting to happen instant impact guy might be waiting right there at 28 for a patient, smart, and shrewd draft manager to scoop up and plug into his starting lineup, Devin McCourty says HI!

Even if that guy was JJ Watt, VJC

BTW that is a good point on the rookie salary cap that I DIDN'T think of, and the only logical reason someone has given that their might not be one. I could very well be argued that the current draft that was negotiated under the old CBA should have the same rookie wage rules as that CBA.

Now while I think it could also be argue just a reasonably that any new agreement could include a clause to cover that issue. Remember the Owner were offering the players taking $300MM from the rookies and gving it to the Vets. I think the Vets might like of like that put in any deal that eventually comes down the pike...and not wait until 2012 for it to happen.

 

[patfanken]

OK,OK, I surrender. I'm not one of those posters who goes down with the ship regardless of the valid positions against him. I am convinced that we SHOULD NOT take the plunge and give up what it would cost to trade up into the top 5. Clearly the can't miss players that I'd hope to get aren't exactly can't miss, and the cost isn't worth the risk.

HOWEVER, the risk to move up to 10 or lower DOES make sense, IF you end up with the guy BB really wants and doesn't just settle for what is there. Hopefully there really is a particular guy that BB covets over all the other 2nd tier defensive players.

And if there is that guy, I'd appreciate it if after the draft he posted to the board exactly who that guy was....and why.

 

[Off The Grid]

By the way, "OutSide the Box" is the LAST term I would use to describe the notion of packaging an whole pile of Picks to Trade Up.

It's a very conventional suggestion around these parts.

Conventonal for some. But unwise to others. Year after year we see teams trading up and getting burned by busts. And yes Vernon Gholston is one of those cautionary tales that bear repeating.

Gholston's scouting report]Vernon Gholston Scouting Report - 2008 NFL Draft Prospect:
"Vernon Gholston is quickly becoming a force to be reckoned with. Gholston started all 12 regular season games at DE for the Ohio State for the second straight year. The fourth year junior finished with 15.5 tackles for loss this season, 14 of them sacks. The 6'4", 264 lbs. Buckeye is practically a fixture in opposing backfields the last two seasons. In November, he could be seen abusing the vaunted Michigan O-Line for 3 sacks and was the only man to beat Jake Long for a sack this season."

Gholston looked like a 'can't-miss-prospect' and the Jets took the bait. What did they give up in the process to get a guy who has produced ZERO sacks his entire NFL career and who was recently cut loose? A cap killing 5 year/40m dollar deal for an unproven rookie in 2008. Expect those numbers to be even higher for 2011.

"The New York Jets have reached a five-year contract agreement with first-round draft pick Vernon Gholston that includes $21 million in guarantees, culminating negotiations that continued into the early morning hours.

The linebacker's deal could max out at $50 million if he reaches all of his performance clauses. If the No. 6 pick does not, the deal would still be worth $32.5 million." Source: Gholston's contract with Jets includes $21M in guaranteed money - NFL - ESPN

The Jets crippled their salary cap for 3 years and gave up over $21m in guaranteed money that they'll never get back. They also had to wates one of their precious 53 man roster slots each of those seasons on a guy who would never produce. The Jets didn't just lose money they tied up valuable resources in the hope that the 'switch' would eventually turn on for their big investment.

Oh and who is being touted this year, isn't it Von Miller in the top 3 or 5? What do scouts say about him?

One said:
"Positives: Extremely disruptive pass rusher, is great at collapsing the pocket and forcing quarterbacks to step into pressure, forcing bad decisions... Has a high motor, is asked to blitz constantly and does not stop pursuing the quarterback until the ball is downfield... Can deliver crushing blows to opposing quarterback if he takes the right angle, tackles through opponents and does not stop at first contact... Very good at wrap-up tackling, begins many tackles at hip level and then maintains force while wrapping legs of ball carrier... Incredible production, had 27 sacks in the last two seasons.."

But another said:
“[Miller's] got some Vernon Gholston in him,” former NFL scout Dave Razzano told Matt Maiocco of CSNBayArea.com.

Razzano spent two decades as an NFL Scout. His opinion differs sharply from those who see Miller as one of the safer picks in the draft.

“I’m not a big Von Miller fan,” Razzano said. “In looking at Big-12 tape, he does not have a motor. He doesn’t chase hard. They run at him, and he doesn’t fight off blockers. When he gets sacks, a lot of times he’s not getting blocked. He’s a one-move guy.”

FYI the proposed rookie salary cap. Even if one is agreed to, there's no way it will be applied retroactively to the 2011 draft because this draft was held under the old CBA. And every qualifed agent out there is a lawyer. How do you think the NFL fancies 32 lawsuits in the 1st round alone? So a 'rookie cap' is NOT gonna happen till 2012 at the earliest even if AGREED upon.

People here are also proposing trading THREE picks for ONE for the privilege of drafting a possible bust. The higher up you go, the riskier you get because the more you can lose. Whereas if you draft THREE players, maybe some of them bust out but you have a chance of at least 1 or 2 of them working out well for you. And chances are the finacials for 3 players taken at picks 17, 28, and 60 will be less overall than the player taken at pick #5. That's how crazy rookie salaries have gotten. The 2008 Gholston contract is probably puny compared to what a rookie drafted at #6 or higher will command in 2011.

In other words, I am VEHEMENTLY on the verge of ALLERGICALLY against trading up multiple valuable resources on what by definition is a risk. The draft is a crapshoot. The only senisble way to hedge against the inevitable busts, and every gambler thinks they are proof against this, like the people saying the Pats scouting is SO GREAT, they could never MESS UP A PICK!, say hello to Laurence Maroney and Chad Jackon for me, well I have news, IT HAPPENS!

So let's try to keep our expectations reasonable instead of dreaming up these pie in the sky fantasies. That impact player might not be the guy drafted at #1, #5, or even #17. The All-Pro waiting to happen instant impact guy might be waiting right there at 28 for a patient, smart, and shrewd draft manager to scoop up and plug into his starting lineup, Devin McCourty says HI!

AMEN, Brothah!! You came off the rails a bit, there, but I am WITH ya!! :rocker:

I'm sure I don't need to explain to you ~ or to anyone around here ~ that I am a STAUNCH advocate of Trading Down, and NO fan of Trading Up.

With great respect to Brother Ken, I would be HORRIFIED if what he advocates came to pass.

*However, I do occasionally espouse the Trade Up, and ~ to a certain extent ~ I would VERY happily do so to acquire the services of one Justin Watt, esquire.

 

[VJCPatriot]

OK,OK, I surrender. I'm not one of those posters who goes down with the ship regardless of the valid positions against him. I am convinced that we SHOULD NOT take the plunge and give up what it would cost to trade up into the top 5. Clearly the can't miss players that I'd hope to get aren't exactly can't miss, and the cost isn't worth the risk.

HOWEVER, the risk to move up to 10 or lower DOES make sense, IF you end up with the guy BB really wants and doesn't just settle for what is there. Hopefully there really is a particular guy that BB covets over all the other 2nd tier defensive players.

And if there is that guy, I'd appreciate it if after the draft he posted to the board exactly who that guy was....and why.

I agree that a modest move up for a particular guy that BB likes could be smart. Especially since we can recoup pick value later by trading down from 28 or 33. I just don't like the idea of a team giving up the sun and the moon and then having the very real possible of that player busting and leaving a mess of the salary cap and a void still to be filled in the next draft.

AMEN, Brothah!! You came off the rails a bit, there, but I am WITH ya!! :rocker:

I'm sure I don't need to explain to you ~ or to anyone around here ~ that I am a STAUNCH advocate of Trading Down, and NO fan of Trading Up.

With great respect to Brother Ken, I would be HORRIFIED if what he advocates came to pass.

*However, I do occasionally espouse the Trade Up, and ~ to a certain extent ~ I would VERY happily do so to acquire the services of one Justin Watt, esquire.

Right, I really like Watt. But I wouldn't give up too much to move up for him. There are multiple first round caliber defensive ends in this year's draft. I think the key is to upgrade the team while maximizing value.

2009 and 2010 were arguably two of the Pats most successful drafts in recent memory, yet we didn't pick a player earlier than 28. I think we can get a VERY good player somewhere in the teens, and then some solid players to fill holes in rounds 2 and 3. Once we get to round 4 and later those are the developmental players who might be good if given time to develop.

So if the Pats do their homework well and get a little lucky maybe they hit on a few guys the caliber of a McCourty, a Vollmer, or a Gronkowski. I'm pretty excited about the 2011 draft and I know you guys are too. Just had to get that off my chest. Because I think BB has been playing the draft like a master lately and I can't seeing trading way up and using a lot of resources for one guy as his MO.

 

[jeffbiologist]

The only major trade up scenarios I see are either because we cant (not wont)trade for future picks or if there is a cba agreement that lowers the cost of high picks. If we are locked into using all the picks in this draft I can definately see trying to maximize that value with a trade up to about #10 if that players value is worth the pick.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Mayo was a result of great drafting by the Patriots at pick 10. We had the 49er pick that year as everyone remembers so ofcourse we weren't trading up. Their 1st round success is almost flawless in Belichicks era of coaching so if he felt strongly about moving up for a player he liked I'm all for it. He knows what he needs and if he feels someone like Dareus, Quinn, Miller or whoever could help this team win a super bowl than who are we to argue the cost?

 

[Off The Grid]

AMEN, Brothah!! You came off the rails a bit, there, but I am WITH ya!! :rocker:

I'm sure I don't need to explain to you ~ or to anyone around here ~ that I am a STAUNCH advocate of Trading Down, and NO fan of Trading Up.

With great respect to Brother Ken, I would be HORRIFIED if what he advocates came to pass.

*However, I do occasionally espouse the Trade Up, and ~ to a certain extent ~ I would VERY happily do so to acquire the services of one Justin Watt, esquire.

Right, I really like Watt. But I wouldn't give up too much to move up for him. There are multiple first round caliber defensive ends in this year's draft. I think the key is to upgrade the team while maximizing value.

2009 and 2010 were arguably two of the Pats most successful drafts in recent memory, yet we didn't pick a player earlier than 28. I think we can get a VERY good player somewhere in the teens, and then some solid players to fill holes in rounds 2 and 3. Once we get to round 4 and later those are the developmental players who might be good if given time to develop.

So if the Pats do their homework well and get a little lucky maybe they hit on a few guys the caliber of a McCourty, a Vollmer, or a Gronkowski. I'm pretty excited about the 2011 draft and I know you guys are too. Just had to get that off my chest. Because I think BB has been playing the draft like a master lately and I can't seeing trading way up and using a lot of resources for one guy as his MO.

Indeed. The last two Drafts have been amazing.

I really think that those guys who're clamoring for us to go ALL IN and simply DESTROY the Draft Pick Equity that Coach Bill the Mad has carefully built up over the last few years...have completely missed what makes this team ~ this Dynasty ~ succesfull.

We were not built around an elite handfull of players.

The Patriots have always been the ultimate TEAM.

...of ANY sport.

We have always been an Whole that was FAR greater than the sum of our Parts.

Truly, it amazes me that anyone can lose touch with what made our Dynasty.

...and, indeed: what makes our Dynasty special.

 

[supafly]

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?

Actually Ken, there are 2 good reasons why this subject is still in limbo.

1. The reason that we have spoke at great lengths to, the same one that VJC correctly pointed out. This yr's draft was negotiated under the 2006 CBA, and therefore it makes a lot of sense that there very well may be rules in place that coincide with the 'old' CBA.

2. There is still a somewhat decent chance that there WILL NOT be an agreement in place with a new CBA this season, that they will eventually get back to work, but under the rules of this past year, uncapped salary cap etc. This would obviously happen if Judge Nelson rules in place of the players, and the appeal is not overturned. They would go back to work (which will be enough for right now, considering the dire alternative) and the 'new' CBA may not be agreed upon until NEXT year. Actually, the draft/no draft situation next year may be the turning point and key to finally getting a deal done. Who knows? The point is that there very well may be a season this year ordered by the courts. That would make last season's rules in place.

So, in essence there is absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that there will be a rookie cap in play for this year. NONE. I really think it's 50/50, if that. Especially since there can still be football without agreeing to a new CBA, and that is a distinct possibility. The more I think about it, I don't even know if your odds are 50/50. They may be on the side of there NOT being a rookie cap, considering the situations and options involved. Then again, you MAY very well be right too. If you remember, my statement regarded "the uncertainty in this yr's draft regarding the supposed rookie wage scale." I stand by that statement.

As far as BB not giving up Ditka style picks, of course he won't. No one is saying anything of the sort, but for a guy who covets extra picks like a fine collector, even giving up 1 or 2 is not his style. Maybe we see him take a chance this yr, but if I had to wager, it would be that he WILL NOT.

As always, just my opinion. Certainly not saying that I am 'right,' and you are 'wrong.' Just giving reasons why I see uncertainty, and us actually coming away with MORE picks than we originally had--this yr and the next, not less.