A note on durability from the Herald

[Oswlek]

New England does not always go need in first round. Watson wasn't a need.

Watson was the second pick taken, so he's a different animal. Feel free to change my earlier comment to "first selection" rather than "first round" as it's probably more accurate.

 

[Joker]

Clive walford is a gronk like player. Not as big but great hands good routes good blocker.

No, he's not. He's more of a move TE and not a very good in line blocker. Unspectacular speed.Scouts knock his route running. He rounds a lot of routes off and allows goods angles by DB's. He'd be a work in progress as a mid round draft pick. IMHO.

 

[RayClay]

NE always goes need in the first round. Always.

Sure, it may be that it is just coincidence... or that "need" is a component of the value equation, but it is noteworthy that first rounders are always players who just so happen to play a position where a major role, even a starting slot most times, is open.

So, if you want to figure out where NE is going on draft day - assuming they don't trade out, of course - find the position that is suspiciously bare. If they don't snag one right off the bat, its a good bet a double dip is coming.

I disagree. There were other positions besides defensive lineman that were weaker, yet they picked three in the first round in the 2000s.

 

[Oswlek]

I disagree. There were other positions besides defensive lineman that were weaker, yet they picked three in the first round in the 2000s.

All three were needs, perhaps even the biggest need on the team.

Seymour - could have gone anywhere at that point.
Warren - after the failed Steve Martin attempt and the atrocious run defense of 2002, it was a foregone conclusion that the team would go DT early. Speculation was that they were going to go as far as trading up for Dwayne Robertson.
Wilfork - after letting Washington walk, the biggest need in the starting lineup was DT, enter Vince.

NE's first pick is always need selection. The only marginally debatable one was McCourty, but that turned into a need quickly.

 

[neuronet]

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/patriots_nfl/new_england_patriots/2015/02/the_super_charged_six

Per the Herald:

• Only 6 Patriots started all 19 games last season.
• Only 3 Patriots started 18 games.

I can think of only 1 whose exclusion from those lists is bogus (Gronk, who only missed one game all season).

The 9 guys are:

• Brady
• Revis
• McCourty
• Wilfork (!)
• Solder and Vollmer (!)
• Ninkovich (duh)
• Chung
• Collins

Depth matters.

I wonder what are the values for every team in the league (or the mean/sem)? Is this pretty standard?

 

[patchick]

NE's first pick is always need selection.

Pretty much, yep -- with the understanding that they s0metimes target a critical need a year in advance to be sure the player will be ready (e.g. Solder).

 

[Oswlek]

Pretty much, yep -- with the understanding that they s0metimes target a critical need a year in advance to be sure the player will be ready (e.g. Solder).

I could be wrong, but I recall there being some question of whether Light was going to return for 2011, so it may have been even more pressing than that. I know I wrote before the draft that OT was my top need.

I think the genesis of the "Bill always goes for BPA!" commentary is the fact that the LB position was oddly ignored for so long. I speculated for years that Bill doesn't think a draft pick can come in and play right away, placing more value on FA and developmental prospects, and still have no idea how accurate that is. With the new style of defense, we'll probably never know.

 

[rookBoston]

I could be wrong, but I recall there being some question of whether Light was going to return for 2011, so it may have been even more pressing than that. I know I wrote before the draft that OT was my top need.

No, you're absolutely right. Light was a FA that year, and if he had walked, we would have had nothing at LT to speak of. Solder was a serious need. The fact that Light re-upped for another 2 years after drafting Solder make it seem like a luxury pick (and Solder even played some TE for us as a rookie, if you remember). But at the time, no question LT was an urgent need.

I'm quite sure Pioli mentioned to the media (shortly after going to KC) that the Pats always drafted for need. Always. He described it as a core to their draft philosophy. As I remember it, he said it in a way that acknowledged popular opinion is BPA is best, but asserted the Pats never drafted BPA. For the Pats it is always Need or Trade Out for someone that wants the BPA, and then fill the Need a little lower in the draft. I'll dig around for a reference.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

It's not clear to me that need plays a big role in the first pick. Everyone was predicting an edge rusher in the draft for around 5 years before picking up Jones. They had one of the worst secondary's ever in 2011, yet didn't pick up a secondary player with either 1st rounder the next year. After getting Hightower they had two top talents at LBer with Mayo making it one of the stronger positions on the team, yet the next year they grabbed another LBer.

Outside of QB you can pretty much justify any position as one of need, especially when talking 1st round players because they should be an improvement most of the time. I think it just plays a role where your not going to draft a guy if you don't think he can beat out who you have. But part of that depends on how good he is. If he's good enough he should be able to beat out just about anybody.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Regardless of TE being a need or not, this draft is a dumpster fire at the position. Maxx Williams looks good, but he's going to be drafted too high by some team looking for a homeless man's Gronk. After that, Funchess looks interesting as a conversion project.

After that, you're pretty much exclusively looking at day 3-type prospects. There are guys who could become good, but nobody especially intriguing IMO. If you're looking for a big TE who can block and catch a little, I could see Nick Boyle or Ben Koyack being considered. Warford maybe as more of a Hernandez type, but without a lot of the athletic traits that made Hernandez a standout. I dunno, just not much there to get excited about.

Basically, I just don't see the Pats wasting their time trying to draft a TE this year, not when positions where we have at least as much of a need have a lot of talent available.

 

[Oswlek]

It's not clear to me that need plays a big role in the first pick. Everyone was predicting an edge rusher in the draft for around 5 years before picking up Jones. They had one of the worst secondary's ever in 2011, yet didn't pick up a secondary player with either 1st rounder the next year. After getting Hightower they had two top talents at LBer with Mayo making it one of the stronger positions on the team, yet the next year they grabbed another LBer.

Outside of QB you can pretty much justify any position as one of need, especially when talking 1st round players because they should be an improvement most of the time. I think it just plays a role where your not going to draft a guy if you don't think he can beat out who you have. But part of that depends on how good he is. If he's good enough he should be able to beat out just about anybody.

The counter to those are:

2012: After losing Anderson to FA, getting little out of Ellis and Carter's injury.... as well as only bringing in Scott, DE was a huge need. The secondary was weak, but at least you went in 2012 with a Chung and Dowling (supposedly) healthy and you brought in Gregory. Of course, they still selected Wilson #48 overall.

2013: A cover LB was an enormous need, and had been for a while.

As I wrote above, the lack of an OLB/DE prospect remains puzzling, but just a cursory run through makes it clear that need is a big part of the equation for that first pick.

Seymour - could have gone a lot of ways
Graham - this was predictable, and even more so with the benefit of hindsight
Warren - If polled, I'd wager that at least 80% of Pats fans would have predicted a DT.
Wilfork - A Washington sized hole
Mankins - the one spot without a starter penciled in
Maroney - Dillon fell off a cliff in 2005
Meriweather - Rodney was tailing off, getting injured the past two seasons and Geno wasn't the same
Mayo - Finally a LB!
Chung - Needed a SS
McCourty - the one time a top overall pick appeared to come at a position of strength (Bodden/Butler).
Solder - Light was a question mark and only one more year at most, and LT a premium position
Jones - discussed above
Collins - discussed above
Easley - A pass rushing DT? I'm game!

Excluding Seymour, because the team was a mess, I predicted the position of the player selected first simply by analyzing roster construction 7 of the 13 times. Granted, I had long before decided Bill just wasn't going to select a DE/OLB in the first round, so that may have inflated my numbers a little (though it is also the reason I got 2012 wrong ). It also could be pointed out that the times the consensus top need was bypassed, it was quickly filled and even doubled up (2010 TE, 2013 WR).

It's really illuminating when viewed all at once. Just look at that Warren/Wilfork/Mankins run, I bet even Mel Kiper Jr got those positions right in most of his mocks!

 

[RayClay]

All three were needs, perhaps even the biggest need on the team.

Seymour - could have gone anywhere at that point.
Warren - after the failed Steve Martin attempt and the atrocious run defense of 2002, it was a foregone conclusion that the team would go DT early. Speculation was that they were going to go as far as trading up for Dwayne Robertson.
Wilfork - after letting Washington walk, the biggest need in the starting lineup was DT, enter Vince.

NE's first pick is always need selection. The only marginally debatable one was McCourty, but that turned into a need quickly.

Why didn't we keep picking Dlinemen after Seymour and Warren left?

 

[Oswlek]

Why didn't we keep picking Dlinemen after Seymour and Warren left?

Isn't this question a little narrow focused?

I ran through the entire list, other than McCourty and maybe Collins, what player wasn't at a position of top need?

 

[Oswlek]

Why didn't we keep picking Dlinemen after Seymour and Warren left?

Just for ****s and giggles, I'll elaborate.

In 2009, NE had both and drafted a guy in the second round. In 2010, I thought they might, which is why I was surprised when McCourty was selected. In 2011, particularly coming off the loss to the Jets when a bare DL played a major role, I wanted a DL but had OT and RB as higher needs (largely due to hitting on Love/Deaderick and still having Vince). In 2012 they did go DL, albeit an end. In 2014 they went DL again.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

The counter to those are:

2012: After losing Anderson to FA, getting little out of Ellis and Carter's injury.... as well as only bringing in Scott, DE was a huge need. The secondary was weak, but at least you went in 2012 with a Chung and Dowling (supposedly) healthy and you brought in Gregory. Of course, they still selected Wilson #48 overall.

2013: A cover LB was an enormous need, and had been for a while.

As I wrote above, the lack of an OLB/DE prospect remains puzzling, but need is still unquestionably a primary factor in the first selection. Just a cursory run through makes it clear.

Seymour - could have gone a lot of ways
Graham - this was predictable, and even more so with the benefit of hindsight
Warren - If polled, I'd wager that at least 80% of Pats fans would have predicted a DT.
Wilfork - A Washington sized hole
Mankins - the one spot without a starter penciled in
Maroney - Dillon fell off a cliff in 2005
Meriweather - Rodney was tailing off, getting injured the past two seasons and Geno wasn't the same
Mayo - Finally a LB!
Chung - Needed a SS
McCourty - the one time a top overall pick appeared to come at a position of strength (Bodden/Butler).
Solder - Light was a question mark and only one more year at most, and LT a premium position
Jones - discussed above
Collins - discussed above
Easley - A pass rushing DT? I'm game!

Excluding Seymour, because the team was a mess, I predicted the position of the player selected first simply by analyzing roster construction 7 of the 13 times. Granted, I had long before decided Bill just wasn't going to select a DE/OLB in the first round, so that may have inflated my numbers a little (though it is also the reason I got 2012 wrong ). It also could be pointed out that the times the consensus top need was bypassed, it was quickly filled and even doubled up (2010 TE, 2013 WR).

It's really illuminating when viewed all at once. Just look at that Warren/Wilfork/Mankins run, I bet even Mel Kiper Jr got those positions right in most of his mocks!

Okay, so what's your prediction this year? Bear in mind, if you are wrong I will forever haunt you on this board by clicking "disagree" and never give an explanation why I disagree.

 

[Oswlek]

Okay, so what's your prediction this year? Bear in mind, if you are wrong I will forever haunt you on this board by clicking "disagree" and never give an explanation why I disagree.

LOL!

Can I just tell you how much I hate those rogue dislikes? What the hell is the point? Can't we just discuss things?

As of right now, you'd have to say the secondary is a top target, but that could change greatly if McCourty returns or Revis is extended. Assuming both stay, I'd be looking hard at the OL with a wildcard at RB (assuming a trade back). I just get the feeling that we're approaching the point when RBs are so devalued throughout the league that they become an arbitrage opportunity for Bill.

FA will have a big say in how the roster looks, so hit me up in a month or two and I'll go on the record with something more concrete.

 

[RPCity]

LOL!

Can I just tell you how much I hate those rogue dislikes? What the hell is the point? Can't we just discuss things?

Sorry. I couldn't help it.