Pats wanted Stewart Bradley? [merged]

[patchick]

From today's Globe:

Remember the name Stewart Bradley. When the Philadelphia Eagles selected Bradley in the third round of last weekend's draft, the news was met with a groan in the Patriots' draft room. The Nebraska linebacker was a player the Patriots would have been pleased to draft with the 91st overall selection, but the Eagles snared him 87th. As it turns out, it was a bit of payback for the Eagles, who were hoping to see Miami safety Brandon Meriweather available 26th overall in the first round before the Patriots took him two spots earlier. With Bradley off the board, the Patriots ended up trading their third-round pick to the Raiders.
http://www.boston.com/sports/articles/2007/05/06/making_the_lambeau_leap/?page=4

Yet another example of how you can't always divine strategy from results. Yep, the Pats were indeed targeting a day-one LB...the very one many of us felt was the best fit for their system.

At the risk of riling up the koolaid police...ARGH! So there's one and only one player you think is worth drafting at 91, you're sitting on a pile of day-2 picks in a weak draft, he's falling to the very bottom of his projected draft range...you couldn't just trade up for him?

Sigh.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

From today's Globe:

Remember the name Stewart Bradley. When the Philadelphia Eagles selected Bradley in the third round of last weekend's draft, the news was met with a groan in the Patriots' draft room. The Nebraska linebacker was a player the Patriots would have been pleased to draft with the 91st overall selection, but the Eagles snared him 87th. As it turns out, it was a bit of payback for the Eagles, who were hoping to see Miami safety Brandon Meriweather available 26th overall in the first round before the Patriots took him two spots earlier. With Bradley off the board, the Patriots ended up trading their third-round pick to the Raiders.
http://www.boston.com/sports/articles/2007/05/06/making_the_lambeau_leap/?page=4

Yet another example of how you can't always divine strategy from results. Yep, the Pats were indeed targeting a day-one LB...the very one many of us felt was the best fit for their system.

At the risk of riling up the koolaid police...ARGH! So there's one and only one player you think is worth drafting at 91, you're sitting on a pile of day-2 picks in a weak draft, he's falling to the very bottom of his projected draft range...you couldn't just trade up for him?

Sigh.

What I take from it is this: he may have fallen to the bottom of his projected draft range . . . but that was the very top of where the Pats were willing to take him.

Of course, it means that now those of us who were on the Bradley wagon (Box?) are now free to jump on the Laurinaitis bandwagon.

 

[patchick]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

What I take from it is this: he may have fallen to the bottom of his projected draft range . . . but that was the very top of where the Pats were willing to take him.

I don't know...you think that if the Pats had pick #87 they would have passed on Bradley because he was only worth #91? I'm guessing they were just playing a game of chicken and lost in this case. Yeah, you can't win them all. But this one bugs me.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

I don't know...you think that if the Pats had pick #87 they would have passed on Bradley because he was only worth #91? I'm guessing they were just playing a game of chicken and lost in this case. Yeah, you can't win them all. But this one bugs me.

That's not quite what I'm saying. I think if the Pats had had #87, they might/would have taken him.

What I am saying is that Bradley was someone they wanted to have, but it appears they didn't want him badly enough to fight for him (as opposed to, say, Vince Wilfork). [Personally, I'm more curious as to who the Pats would have taken at 91 had no one come calling.]

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

1) Maybe they tried to trade up and couldn't get it done, who knows.
2) Maybe they guessed (and were wrong) that the next few teams weren't going to take him and they didn't want to give up something for nothing.

In the end, to answer your question, I'm not struggling with it as whoever we get at the top of round three next year will likely be a better prospect.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

I'm also convinced that the Patriots would have taken DeOssie with the 127th. He went between the 110 that we traded for Moss and the 127th that we had. Were they trying to move up? Who knows!

 

[PatsFan37]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

I'm disappointed that with the lack of obvious talent behind the starting LBs, the FO didn't spend a few picks to move up to get Bradley, if that's who they wanted. OTOH, I don't take the trade as evidence of wanting Bradley.

"When the Philadelphia Eagles selected Bradley in the third round of last weekend's draft, the news was met with a groan in the Patriots' draft room." -- per Reiss.

I'm not sure whether to take this literally or speculatively. Was Reiss in the draft room (I doubt it), did he have a source (maybe, but he didn't say). So it's an unattributed groan. Not sure what to make of that.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

1) Maybe they tried to trade up and couldn't get it done, who knows.
2) Maybe they guessed (and were wrong) that the next few teams weren't going to take him and they didn't want to give up something for nothing.

In the end, to answer your question, I'm not struggling with it as whoever we get at the top of round three next year will likely be a better prospect.

True on the better prospect quote. We hae two 1st's and 2 3rds next season. the chances of that 3rd rounder being early value is very likely. They basically traded the 91st for one between 65 and 75 hopefully.

 

[patsox23]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

I trust Reiss more than I do most reporters, especially from the Globe, and if he says "a groan went up" in the war room, I don't doubt it. That blows.

 

[cstjohn17]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

At the risk of riling up the koolaid police...ARGH! So there's one and only one player you think is worth drafting at 91, you're sitting on a pile of day-2 picks in a weak draft, he's falling to the very bottom of his projected draft range...you couldn't just trade up for him?

Sigh.

In my mind looking at the players we landed with the picks we used (leaving out Moss and Welker) I gave the Pats a D. Getting Bradley would have moved it up to a B.

Bradley is versatile enough to play ILB or OLB and was one of the best fits for their defense.The first day haul would have addressed their 2 biggest needs (ILB/OLB and S/CB).

Giving up a 6th rounder or 7th rounder seems like a no brainer especially with some of the immortal players we drafted in those rounds. They have no one to blame but themselves, the whole purpose of having 10+ picks is being able to move around to land the players you like, not to stockpile 6th rounders to take players who will get cut in training camp.

Of course they know what they are doing but the ILB unit lacked quality depth last year (and the year before) and in both cases the depth was exposed as the season progressed.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

Giving up a 6th rounder or 7th rounder seems like a no brainer

No one has said we could have moved up even one spot for a 6th or 7th rounder.

Probably would have taken a 4th.

Bradley for Kareem Brown and the Raiders' #3 next year.
Bradley for Kareem Brown and Randy Moss.

I leave Bradley on the board in either of those scenarios.

 

[patsox23]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

No one has said we could have moved up even one spot for a 6th or 7th rounder.

I agree. That's another pretty big assumption.

 

[patchick]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

No one has said we could have moved up even one spot for a 6th or 7th rounder.

Probably would have taken a 4th.

Bradley for Kareem Brown and the Raiders' #3 next year.
Bradley for Kareem Brown and Randy Moss.

I leave Bradley on the board in either of those scenarios.

The Moss pick was already allotted at that point, so it's Kareem Brown or maybe a 5th+6th to move up about 10 slots from #91. I would definitely take Bradley in either scenario. It's just too rare to find a college LB with Patriots-style measurables to pass up the opportunity in the 3rd. Of course, they might have tried to find a trading partner with no success, who knows?

 

[patsfan55]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

damn
that sux
well one good thing: it means we would after all select a linebacker if we feel he is the right fit
i mean, we werent gonna take him in the first, but the third round, hey at least its day one

ill always wonder if we woulda taken beason at 28 if he were there

 

[sebman2112]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

I'm also convinced that the Patriots would have taken DeOssie with the 127th. He went between the 110 that we traded for Moss and the 127th that we had. Were they trying to move up? Who knows!

I'm not sure about DeOssie, but I think they would have taken Desmond Bishop in the late sixth if the Packers hadn't grabbed him.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

The Moss pick was already allotted at that point

According to all accounts the Moss thing didn't really pick up until after Day One so the pick wasn't gone in the Patriots' mind yet.

so it's Kareem Brown or maybe a 5th+6th to move up about 10 slots from #91. I would definitely take Bradley in either scenario.

I'd still take Brown and the Raiders' #3 over Bradley.

 

[PatsFan37]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

Funny how it seems in free agency the Pats are usually a day late and a dollar short. Except this year they made everyone else look slow and thrifty.

Then in the draft they usually trump other teams, trading up a few spots, stealing players, dealing draft picks left and right. And this year not so much.

I figure they gambled and lost on a few of their favorite LBs. Maybe so much focus on the trade for Moss, with all that intensity, that some of their draft day focus was lost.

Anyone know what time it was that Bradley was picked? I wonder what was going with Moss right around that time. We're lucky they made any picks at all on Sunday.

 

[patchick]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

According to all accounts the Moss thing didn't really pick up until after Day One so the pick wasn't gone in the Patriots' mind yet.

Right, got the timing/rounds mixed up in my head.

I'd still take Brown and the Raiders' #3 over Bradley.

Fair enough, the wisdom of it will have to play out over the long haul.

 

[PatDaPatriot]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

To move up from 91 would have probably required a 5th rounder, of which all they had was an untradeable comp pick. 127 would have been too much to give up just to move up a couple of spots, and getting a 6th in return probably isn't enough to entice a team to move down...

I also believe that if they really wanted Bradley, then they would've put themselves in a position to ensure drafting him. I'm sure they liked him, but probably didn't see the value in moving a 4th rounder or even a 2008 pick for a trade up...

 

[sebman2112]

Re: Anybody else struggling with this Stewart Bradley tidbit?

No one has said we could have moved up even one spot for a 6th or 7th rounder.

Probably would have taken a 4th.

Bradley for Kareem Brown and the Raiders' #3 next year.
Bradley for Kareem Brown and Randy Moss.

I leave Bradley on the board in either of those scenarios.

How would picking Bradley have kept NE from getting Kareem Brown or Randy Moss?

It wouldn't take a fourth rounder to go up a few spots in the late third round, two sixth rounders sounds more accurate.

If NE traded infront of the Eagles going from 91 to 86 (5 spots), they could have drafted Bradley, then traded for Moss, and then draft Kareem Brown. This would have taken away: The Raiders '08 third, Oscar Lua, Justin Rogers, and Mike Richardson.

So NE's draft could have looked like:
Meriweather
The 49ers '08 first
Wes Welker
Stewart Bradley
Randy Moss
Kareem Brown
Clint Oldenburg
Justise Hairston
Corey Hilliard
Mike Elgin

(They might have used their two remaining sixth rounders on Rogers, and Richardson, and that late seventh on Lua, though)

Keep in mind it only cost NE a sixth rounder to move up one spot when they picked Warren in the first round.