#1 Need For the Draft: SAFETY

[cstjohn17]

I'm with you on the premise...whether it's a higher priority than LB I don't much care, we need to find our future at both positions. James Sanders is the only safety on the roster we can count on being around in 2008.

But I disagree that it must be one of those 3 players. There's a deep well of quality safeties in the draft, without any sudden dropoff. Meriweather is a wild card, then you have Weddle right behind the top guys, Gattis right behind him, etc.

You could argue that CB is a higher need that Safety, only 1 player is signed beyond 2007 (Hobbs). Two if you include the guy with the torn ACL they just signed.

Most people agree that S, CB and ILB are the top needs and expect that in the first 4 rounds a player from each position will be drafted. Guessing who gets picked where is the rub.

 

[sebman2112]

I am curious to hear why you would think the Pats would do that? He said two years ago that he would never pay a rookie safety 1st round money. And why would we draft 2?

Not many of you thought RB in the first round prior to last year...

I wan't two Safeties, and think they will draft two Safeties, because that is what they usually do if they perceive a position to be of possible need this year, or the next.

They selected two TE's last year (Thomas & Mills who was converted to FB), two Safeties in 2004 (Guss Scott & Dexter Reid), two D-Linemen in 2003 (Warren & Klecko), two WR's in 2002 (Branch & Givens), two tackles in 2001 (Light & Jones), two TE's in 2001 (Holloway & Love), two CB's in 2001 (Myers & Williams).

Basically if BB & Pioli think a position is of need they will usually spend two picks on that position, and hope at least one of the players they draft develops.

 

[sebman2112]

You could argue that CB is a higher need that Safety, only 1 player is signed beyond 2007 (Hobbs). Two if you include the guy with the torn ACL they just signed.

Most people agree that S, CB and ILB are the top needs and expect that in the first 4 rounds a player from each position will be drafted. Guessing who gets picked where is the rub.

CB is a need position, and I think they will probably draft one day one CB.
NE is going to have ten draft picks, and could spend two picks on Safeties, while still getting good LB, and CB's.

They could take one Safety and one CB in the first, with one LB in the third, and one Safety in the fourth. NE could then use their SIX remaining picks to do draft the BPA.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Not many of you thought RB in the first round prior to last year...

I wan't two Safeties, and think they will draft two Safeties, because that is what they usually do if they perceive a position to be of possible need this year, or the next.

They selected two TE's last year (Thomas & Mills who was converted to FB), two Safeties in 2004 (Guss Scott & Dexter Reid), two D-Linemen in 2003 (Warren & Klecko), two WR's in 2002 (Branch & Givens), two tackles in 2001 (Light & Jones), two TE's in 2001 (Holloway & Love), two CB's in 2001 (Myers & Williams).

Basically if BB & Pioli think a position is of need they will usually spend two picks on that position, and hope at least one of the players they draft develops.

WHY?...Ddo you want two or even one Safety? If Laron Landry fells to us at 24, I would take him, but the others have warts. They are not sized to be Safeties that you spend a #1 pick on, nor are they Super Athletes at that could play both corner and S.

I remember when it was said, BB/SP would never draft G; never draft RB; never draft LB. I remember hearing it said it takes too long to convert a DE to and OLB.

If there is anything I believe is that BB and SP build TEAMS first, and do not collect talent, only.

They are correct that it takes a long time to move a DE into an OLB, UNLESS he is an athletic STUD. Ware, Wimberely and Merriman and LT, all played as rookies. All 3-4 conversions. Three of the 4 for Coaches with the same BB attitude in Tuna and RAC, and surprise surprise BB himself! So much for too long.

But its funny.

NO one says it takes lots of years to train an ILB. BB started Carson, and Pepper as rookies, and drafted them too. Along with LT. BB has had the luxury to avoid addressing the LB corps because he had higher priorities and worry about the 7th or 8th Safety position is not terribly high on his priority list; not when he has not a single reserve LB that can play.

Frankly the only high Safety worth a #1 on this Pats club is Landry. I'd take a CB before a S, and an ILB before a CB. And come back later and take another ILB too; in that observation you are correct BB will take two, sign a FA, and all to insure He gets one need satisfied.

 

[DW Toys]

I wouldent...... Piscitelli ??? Maybe Weddle, but Piscitelli? The good "patriot material" argument changed when they signed Dillon and Stallworth. What is wrong with Nelson?

Danny Cousin,
Nelson is small and the book is cannot tackle well. I think Griffin from Texas seems better IMO. Look at Griffins' tackles last year and compare to any including Landry (plus INT). I agree Weddle would not be bad later on.

Can't believe anybody would be satisfied with our Safeties. After Rodney , who.....? Geno? He play is going down faster than a Stuka dive bomber, Plus he'll get hurt as per usual....Oh ya, in the last year of his contract too. Sanders? What has he done? He is a SOG. Hawkins? Did a nice job as fill but got exposed severely by Peyton. We have ONE safety that is real and he, God Bless him, is one play away from calling it a career.

I think we need two young safeties, not one. And although this might be the worse draft class in ten years or more, there are a few safeties and CB's.

FOX Sports rates the linebacker core as slim and pretty bad too. After a few top round pics you have nada. That is why Hartwell or Briggs make sense. Do you really want to have to wait three years for an Anthony Waters to develop? They rate him a third rounder for crying out loud! What's behind him for pickin's?
DW Toys

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

CB is a need position, and I think they will probably draft one day one CB.
NE is going to have ten draft picks, and could spend two picks on Safeties, while still getting good LB, and CB's.

They could take one Safety and one CB in the first, with one LB in the third, and one Safety in the fourth. NE could then use their SIX remaining picks to do draft the BPA.

I agree.

BB hasn't successfully developed a rookie LB since his days in Cleveland. TBC came close, but his success was marginal. According to WEEI, the Pats are still interested in Ed Hartwell, a run stuffer.

The Pats need a run stuffer to finally replace Ted Johnson on the strong side, a weak side ILB to cover the TEs/RBs on passing plays.

At WILB, I wonder if BB will alter his standard bulk requirements. From the AFCCG, it's obvious that the Pats couldn't handle Indy's spread offense. In fairness to Eric Alexander, Bryan Fletcher would have gotten open with most LBs covering him. As a thought, I'd like to see more emphaisis on S/ILB hybrids rather than DL/LB hybrids on the weak side.

Here's some safties I like...

Michael Griffin
Can play both safety spots. Is a great Teamer.

Josh Gattis
My personal favorite. Big and fast and is great on Teams. Gattis is a sleeper who could sneak into the bottom of round #1.

Eric Weddle

Compares To: CORY CHAVOUS-St. Louis…I consider Chavous to be the most instinctive safety in the league. Like Chavous, Weddle gets maximum use of his athletic ability, combined with great ball reaction skills. Yes, both are not the strongest or fastest you will find at their respective positions, but both offer intelligence, instinctiveness and a a strong desire to make the play that will see Weddle possibly be a regular visitor to the Pro Bowl.

I don't like Meriwheather (character concerns) and don't like Nelson (typical Gator, built for speed and won't hold up physically).

 

[SunnyDenmark]

I most definately disagree with this. Thomas replaces Willie.

Thomas, Bruschi, Colvin and Vrabel is all we have with garbage for depth on the bench.

4 LB spots with 4 LB's=No Depth



Which is exactly what the Colts did to us in the AFCC game. They preyed on our weakness at LB by using TE's to kill us.

1) True - depth is a concern - hopefully J. Seau or Hartwell will be signed for depth. but that still doesn't take away the fact that our starting LB core is one of the BEST (top 5) in the whole NFL and so (in my book) is not as big a need to fill in the draft as safety. Same analogy as our QB situation - we have little depth at QB but overall it is not an area of weakness - just like our LB corps. Although I would also draft a ILB at some point; if two players (one safety and one LB) of the same value were available - I would take the safety first as we are primed to win the SB NOW and safety is our biggest weakness at present.

2) Again true but things have radically changed since the AFCC game. We have Thomas now and he is an upgrade (and younger) than Willie. (Naturally Wille was not here last year). Since that signing, what was our biggest need (LB) have now become our #2 or #3 biggest need in my opinion after Safety and CB.

 

[dryheat44]

We're not drafting based on need, so I don't think the arguments in this thread are really worth anything more than the good debate they provide. Where I weigh in:

I think that Landry is the only safety worth drafting in the first round.
I think that safety is too overvalued a position in general, and especially in this draft. The value of the safety position is in the middle rounds.
I think BB should offer a one-year extension to Geno now. Wilson has no leverage, and it will give him a chance to prove he's rehabilitated. If Geno gets hurt or is ineffective this year, he's not going to be a FA target next spring.
I think BB will draft in the first round whichever players will do the most to improve the 2007 New England Patriots, regardless of the position they play. There are still enough UFAs available to competently plug any depth problems for vet minimum money, or close to it.

 

[sebman2112]

WHY?...Ddo you want two or even one Safety? If Laron Landry fells to us at 24, I would take him, but the others have warts. They are not sized to be Safeties that you spend a #1 pick on, nor are they Super Athletes at that could play both corner and S.

I remember when it was said, BB/SP would never draft G; never draft RB; never draft LB. I remember hearing it said it takes too long to convert a DE to and OLB.

If there is anything I believe is that BB and SP build TEAMS first, and do not collect talent, only.

They are correct that it takes a long time to move a DE into an OLB, UNLESS he is an athletic STUD. Ware, Wimberely and Merriman and LT, all played as rookies. All 3-4 conversions. Three of the 4 for Coaches with the same BB attitude in Tuna and RAC, and surprise surprise BB himself! So much for too long.

But its funny.

NO one says it takes lots of years to train an ILB. BB started Carson, and Pepper as rookies, and drafted them too. Along with LT. BB has had the luxury to avoid addressing the LB corps because he had higher priorities and worry about the 7th or 8th Safety position is not terribly high on his priority list; not when he has not a single reserve LB that can play.

Frankly the only high Safety worth a #1 on this Pats club is Landry. I'd take a CB before a S, and an ILB before a CB. And come back later and take another ILB too; in that observation you are correct BB will take two, sign a FA, and all to insure He gets one need satisfied.

I can see your arguements about not wanting a first round Safety, but I don't understand your arguement against drafting two or even one Safety in the entire draft. NE has 10 draft picks. What would you rather they do with all 10 of those picks? NE could draft one FS, one SS, 2 CB's, 2 LB's, and still have four remaining picks to spend on any other positions. If they don't draft a first round Safety they should at least draft one in the third or fourth, with another in the fifth, or sixth.

Also, Safety is much more of a need position than people think, and BB does draft for need a lot more than people think. I don't think they draft for rookie starters, but for guys who can rotate/backup their rookie year, and start their second. Go back and look at the draft history and you can tell this is what BB & Pioli usually try to do. 2008 is where NE's Safety position becomes even more of a need, and that is why you draft Safeties now.

Rodney is old, and has been severily injured the past two seasons. Might not return next season, and if he does that will likely be it. He's a free agent in '08.

Wilson hasn't been effective since the beginning of '05, and is a free agent after this season. I still like him but he hasn't shown me anything lately, that would keep my confidence level high.

Hawkins who is getting old, struggled late in the season/playoffs, and is also a free agent after this year.

James Sanders is the only effective young Safety on the roster, but I am not sure he has developed into a full times starter, yet. At this point I see him more as a rotational player. Plus, he's a free agent after '08.

Rashad Baker? Please, he is not a good Safety, and will likely never be anything more than an emergancy option/fourth quarter Safety.

Mel Mitchell (already 28) Same as Baker he is not the Safety of the future, and that's what you want sitting behind your current starters, their replacements.

Willie Andrews (to small to play SS 5'9" 182lbs.) He was somewhat intrigueing when NE first selected him, because of his return ability. If anyone remembers correctly NE was actually converting him to CB. I also don't think his return skills lived up to expectations, and that was his biggest attraction, so he might find himself on the waiver wire.

Basically you draft two Safeties to backup/rotate with Harrison, Wilson, Sanders, and Hawkins. After drafting these two more talented Safeties you can cut Mitchell, and Baker. Maybe you keep Andrews because they were trying to convert him to CB, anyways.

this would give you:
Harrison, Wilson, Sanders, Hawkins, Draft pick, Draft pick on the Safety depth chart. Thats 6 Safeties for 2 positions. Also, you could draft a FS who also has slot CB skills so he could play both positions as a rookie lending even more depth to the secondary.

 

[dryheat44]

this would give you:
Harrison, Wilson, Sanders, Hawkins, Draft pick, Draft pick on the Safety depth chart. Thats 6 Safeties for 2 positions. Also, you could draft a FS who also has slot CB skills so he could play both positions as a rookie lending even more depth to the secondary.

That's too many. Especially when you consider Harrison, Wilson, and Hawkins aren't special teams players. I'm not opposed to drafting two safeties, since I don't want one in the first round. But only one would probably make the team, and he might bump Hawkins in order to do so.

Oh, and you have the Andrews situation backwards. He was a corner at Baylor that the Pats drafted as a ST player who could possibly contribute at safety.

 

[sebman2112]

We're not drafting based on need, so I don't think the arguments in this thread are really worth anything more than the good debate they provide. Where I weigh in:

I think that Landry is the only safety worth drafting in the first round.
I think that safety is too overvalued a position in general, and especially in this draft. The value of the safety position is in the middle rounds.
I think BB should offer a one-year extension to Geno now. Wilson has no leverage, and it will give him a chance to prove he's rehabilitated. If Geno gets hurt or is ineffective this year, he's not going to be a FA target next spring.
I think BB will draft in the first round whichever players will do the most to improve the 2007 New England Patriots, regardless of the position they play. There are still enough UFAs available to competently plug any depth problems for vet minimum money, or close to it.

You don't draft for need over anything else. What you would like to draft for is BPA at a positon likely of need in '08. Let's say there's a TE and a Safety on the board at the same time. The TE is ranked slightly higher on my board than the Safety, but I already have three TE's who are good, young, and will contribute for at least the next two/three years. I would slightly reach for the Safety because while being slightly less talented than the TE he can make a more signifigant contribution to my team within the next two seasons. If the TE's telant is far superior to the current TE's on the roster, and the next BPA at a potential positon of need is much less talented, than I cross my fingers and take the TE.

 

[ayjackson]

Also, you could draft a FS who also has slot CB skills so he could play both positions as a rookie lending even more depth to the secondary.

There are some good prospects who fit this bill. Tanard Jackson, Fred Bennett, and CJ Gaddis come to mind.

 

[dryheat44]

You don't draft for need over anything else. What you would like to draft for is BPA at a positon likely of need in '08. Let's say there's a TE and a Safety on the board at the same time. The TE is ranked slightly higher on my board than the Safety, but I already have three TE's who are good, young, and will contribute for at least the next two/three years. I would slightly reach for the Safety because while being slightly less talented than the TE he can make a more signifigant contribution to my team within the next two seasons. If the TE's telant is far superior to the current TE's on the roster, and the next BPA at a potential positon of need is much less talented, than I cross my fingers and take the TE.

I'm Ok with this line of thinking, but that's not the same as thinking "we need to come out of the first round with a LB and a S." That's how accidents happen. In the first round, you draft a player who you've graded as a first rounder, you trade out of the pick, or, in a worse case scenario, you reach for the highest second-round player on your board.

 

[sebman2112]

That's too many. Especially when you consider Harrison, Wilson, and Hawkins aren't special teams players. I'm not opposed to drafting two safeties, since I don't want one in the first round. But only one would probably make the team, and he might bump Hawkins in order to do so.

Oh, and you have the Andrews situation backwards. He was a corner at Baylor that the Pats drafted as a ST player who could possibly contribute at safety.

How is six to many? The two draft picks could contribute on special teams, and if you draft the right FS he could also help out at CB, as a rookie. Right now NE has Harrison, Wilson, Hawkins, Sanders, Baker, Mitchell. that's six Safeties.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
He was a Safety who they wanted to convert to CB, not the other way around:
"2005: One of Baylor's most versatile players, senior All-America candidate Willie Andrews will start at outside safety for the third consecutive year and again ranks as the Bears' top kick returner ... Baylor's all-time leader in total kick return yards (kickoff and punt returns) with 2,057 yards, he needs just 44 kickoff return yards and 11 returns to become the school's career leader in both categories ... His 56 career kickoff returns rank No. 4 all-time at Baylor, while he's No. 3 in kickoff return average (24.68 ypr) and No. 2 in kickoff return yards (1,382) ... Andrews, who also stands No. 5 on BU's career punt return (70), punt return yards (675) and punt return average (9.64 ypr) charts, has made 23 consecutive starts in the secondary entering his final season as a Bear."

 

[sebman2112]

I'm Ok with this line of thinking, but that's not the same as thinking "we need to come out of the first round with a LB and a S." That's how accidents happen. In the first round, you draft a player who you've graded as a first rounder, you trade out of the pick, or, in a worse case scenario, you reach for the highest second-round player on your board.

I'm not in the crowd that thinks they have to draft LB and Safety in the first. I could very easily see them going in different directions. I would like some combination of CB/S/LB in the first three rounds, though.

 

[ayjackson]

I'm Ok with this line of thinking, but that's not the same as thinking "we need to come out of the first round with a LB and a S." That's how accidents happen. In the first round, you draft a player who you've graded as a first rounder, you trade out of the pick, or, in a worse case scenario, you reach for the highest second-round player on your board.

In fairness (=leap of faith?), I think when people say "we need to come out of the first round of the draft with a LB and a S" they are hoping that the LB and S are first round talent. That is, they are hoping for 'Nelson and Siler' and not 'Weddle and Harris'. Well I think that's what they mean anyway.

I understand that you see only Landry on your board for first round LBs and S.

 

[dryheat44]

How is six to many? The two draft picks could contribute on special teams, and if you draft the right FS he could also help out at CB, as a rookie. Right now NE has Harrison, Wilson, Hawkins, Sanders, Baker, Mitchell. that's six Safeties.

Sure. But they're not constrained by a 53 man roster now. Mitchell, as you know, didn't play in 2006. If he was healthy, or Gardner, or Tebucky, etc, Baker wouldn't have been signed. So really, it's 5 safeties, or in reality, 4 safeties and a special teams player who can play safety in case of emergency. Let's say the roster is:

3 QB
5 RB
6 WR
4 TE
9 OL
6 DL
7 LB
4 CB
4 S
3 ST

That leaves you with three spots. Those free spots should go to young players with potential, or ST dynamos.

So instead of drafting two safeties, assuming they'll contribute on STs while they're learning, why don't you draft one safety, and then the best STer regardless of position?

 

[sebman2112]

Sure. But they're not constrained by a 53 man roster now. Mitchell, as you know, didn't play in 2006. If he was healthy, or Gardner, or Tebucky, etc, Baker wouldn't have been signed. So really, it's 5 safeties, or in reality, 4 safeties and a special teams player who can play safety in case of emergency. Let's say the roster is:

3 QB
5 RB
6 WR
4 TE
9 OL
6 DL
7 LB
4 CB
4 S
3 ST

That leaves you with three spots. Those free spots should go to young players with potential, or ST dynamos.

So instead of drafting two safeties, assuming they'll contribute on STs while they're learning, why don't you draft one safety, and then the best STer regardless of position?

Trust me, they'll draft two One at both positions.

Also, as I said you can draft a FS who can help out at CB, which makes him more important since he is contributing to both positions, and you can find Safeties in this draft who are great/good ST players. If one roster spot is being taken up by a player who can help out in three different areas you'll carry extra men.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

If history is any indication, at some point next year, we will need secondary depth. For the past three years, we've been hit hard with injuries back there and BB has had to play young players and they have responded well.
At LB however, whenever BB has played a young player, alexander, TBC, etc. the results have been less than stellar.

Is it easier for BB to find veteran FA LBs than secondary personnel?

 

[AzPatsFan]

I can see your arguements about not wanting a first round Safety, but I don't understand your arguement against drafting two or even one Safety in the entire draft. NE has 10 draft picks. What would you rather they do with all 20 of those picks? NE could draft one FS, one SS, 2 CB's, 2 LB's, and still have four remaining picks to spend on any other positions. If they don't draft a first round Safety they should at least draft one in the third or fourth, with another in the fifth, or sixth.

Also, Safety is much more of a need position than people think, and BB does draft for need a lot more than people think. I don't think they draft for rookie starters, but for guys who can rotate/backup their rookie year, and start their second. Go back and look at the draft history and you can tell this is what BB & Pioli usually try to do. 2008 is where NE's Safety position becomes even more of a need, and that is why you draft Safeties now.

Rodney is old, and has been severily injured the past two seasons. Might not return next season, and if he does that will likely be it. He's a free agent in '08.

Wilson hasn't been effective since the beginning of '05, and is a free agent after this season. I still like him but he hasn't shown me anything lately, that would keep my confidence level high.

Hawkins who is getting old, struggled late in the season/playoffs, and is also a free agent after this year.

James Sanders is the only effective young Safety on the roster, but I am not sure he has developed into a full times starter, yet. At this point I see him more as a rotational player. Plus, he's a free agent after '08.

Rashad Baker? Please, he is not a good Safety, and will likely never be anything more than an emergancy option/fourth quarter Safety.

Mel Mitchell (already 28) Same as Baker he is not the Safety of the future, and that's what you want sitting behind your current starters, their replacements.

Willie Andrews (to small to play SS 5'9" 182lbs.) He was somewhat intrigueing when NE first selected him, because of his return ability. If anyone remembers correctly NE was actually converting him to CB. I also don't think his return skills lived up to expectations, and that was his biggest attraction, so he might find himself on the waiver wire.

Basically you draft two Safeties to backup/rotate with Harrison, Wilson, Sanders, and Hawkins. After drafting these two more talented Safeties you can cut Mitchell, and Baker. Maybe you keep Andrews because they were trying to convert him to CB, anyways.

this would give you:
Harrison, Wilson, Sanders, Hawkins, Draft pick, Draft pick on the Safety depth chart. Thats 6 Safeties for 2 positions. Also, you could draft a FS who also has slot CB skills so he could play both positions as a rookie lending even more depth to the secondary.

There is also one SIGNIFICANT tea leave to read. BB/SP have NOT signed any depth LBs. Is that a sign that they expect to invest in LBs in this draft? What is different about this draft? It has 4 to 6, 3-4 ILB candidates, and but 1 or 2 of the 3-4 DE/OLBs conversion candidates.

We have an old guy and a younger vet, both have been injured; both have been mentioned for the pro bowl before their injuries; behind them we have ZERO, three UDFA ST type scrubs...

Yup... I'd draft to fill that position we have Tedy Bruschi who is old and often injured. The other guy is younger Mike Vrabel 31, but has been injured with a bad back. The depth is nonexistent consisting of undrafted scrubs/ST types.