Drafting A Quarterback

[mgteich]

As Kraft says, "obviously" we should consider drafting a quarterback. Of course, he defers to Belichick.

IMHO, it is time to again draft a quarterback, and another next year. Going into 2019 with Brady and two top prospects makes a lot of sense to me. The penalty for not developing your own quarterbacks is paying $25M or more a year for a quarterback that someone else is willing to give up.

The open question is how high. Some would say draft in the 6th round or 7th round. After all, that worked twice: Brady and Cassell.

I would note that almost all top quarterbacks have been drafted in the first two rounds, many in the top 10 of the draft.

I would expect us to draft a quarterback in the first two rounds, perhaps at 31. At 31, we'd have the pick of those not in the top 4, who will likely be gone by the middle of the round. Jackson form Louisville has been mentioned. Drafting in the first round give the team 5 years of control, instead of 4.

 

[Soliel]

Maybe they trade up and grab one or get Manziel

 

[SHOWTIME15]

In an ideal scenario, we trade up to get Josh Allen, but that’s not happening.

I can see Bill taking a QB in the 1st or 2nd round.

 

[Tunescribe]

Ugh, I hate the idea of drafting someone high who won't contribute immediately. Apart from Brady, the whole quarterback issue with this team is a pain in the butt.

 

[mgteich]

Maybe they trade up and grab one or get Manziel

maybe they draft one early AND get Manziel. Manziel costs almost nothing to bring into camp (as we did with Tebow who didn't work out).

 

[mgteich]

If one of the top quarterbacks starts to drop, there will be lots of teams giving a great deal in trade to move up. I don't see Allan dropping out of the top 12. If he did, I could see us trading up. Our 1st and 2nd would move us to about 15.

In an ideal scenario, we trade up to get Josh Allen, but that’s not happening.

I can see Bill taking a QB in the 1st or 2nd round.

 

[maust]

I would note that almost all top quarterbacks have been drafted in the first two rounds, many in the top 10 of the draft.

Drafting in the first round give the team 5 years of control, instead of 4.

No point in listing them since we all know there is a long list of great QB's that were not taken in the 1st two rounds and busts that were but the 5th year option does make a 'reach' at the bottom of the 1st justifiable depending on what else is available. That in itself would make for an interesting discussion. In a vacuum it would seem to make sense, given the cap % a starter takes up, to prioritize the QB position based on that 5th year option but in the real world nothing happens in a vacuum and the same could be said to some degree about other positions if you hit big on the pick. In the end for the Pats I don't think that option really justifies taking a QB a full round earlier than he should go but certainly it is a viable strategy for a team trading up/down to grab a QB at the bottom of the 1st.

Barring something unforeseen I'd expect the Pats to draft a QB somewhere in the first few rounds.

 

[Love The Drake]

What would it cost to get to Allen?

 

[maineman209]

maybe they draft one early AND get Manziel. Manziel costs almost nothing to bring into camp (as we did with Tebow who didn't work out).

Seems to me that the Pats could add potentially two QBs on draft weekend - one drafted in the 1st or 2nd, and another (e.g., Mike White) in the 6th/7th, or as a UDFA.

The Pats don't have a lot of inexperienced WRs at the moment who might need a 3rd veteran arm to "break them in". And any rookie QB will need all the throwing reps he can get - why siphon any off to a veteran camp arm?

 

[maineman209]

What would it cost to get to Allen?

Too much.

 

[jboston19]

What would it cost to get to Allen?

Sounds like he's going top 5. The Pats aren't getting there easily. The cost would probably most of the next three drafts.

 

[PWRxWLF]

We need to draft at least one or two qb’s quickly. Let them bust and get that outta the way. Then we draft the true heir. That way some rookie doesn’t have to come and try to be the guy that takes over for Brady. Could you imagine that pressure? You’d have to have balls of steel!

 

[signbabybrady]

FWIW, there is value in taking one in the first rd so we get a fifth year option. We'd still have Jimmy right now if he had been taken in the first.

If we are picking at 31 and there is a defensive player and qb we like it might make sense to hope that defender is there at 41 and take the qb.

 

[oceansizer]

I'll go with someone like Faulk or Lauletta for instance. It is not an immediate need so taking a QB with our highest picks is a bit reckless. 2 years let's say with TB12 would be enough to learn the system even for QBs from lower rounds. Too many holes in the defense to sacrifice highest picks.

 

[patsinthesnow]

The top four QBs are likely going top 5 via trade ups.

Our crop to choose from in Rounds 1-3:

Mason Rudolph
Lamar Jackson
Kyle Lauletta

Rounds 3-5:

Luke Falk
Mike White
Logan Woodside
Chase Litton



We’re up against long odds in rounds 2-3. We may have drafted the 2nd best 2nd round QB in the last 20 years behind Drew Brees (Jimmy G), the best 7th round QB in 20 years (Cassel) & obviously the best 6th round QB of all time.

Clearly BB & co. are good at this QB development thing. I’m honestly fine with any three of the tier II QBs.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

FWIW, there is value in taking one in the first rd so we get a fifth year option. We'd still have Jimmy right now if he had been taken in the first.

(A) They weren't willing to pay $22M for the franchise tag, so I'm not at all convinced they'd be willing to pay $19M for the fifth-year tender.

(B) The fifth year, right now, only matters if they expect Brady to play exactly four more seasons. Any more, and the rookie will "time out"; any less, and the team would have at least a season to decide if he's "the one."

 

[maineman209]

I'll go with someone like Faulk or Lauletta for instance. It is not an immediate need so taking a QB with our highest picks is a bit reckless. 2 years let's say with TB12 would be enough to learn the system even for QBs from lower rounds. Too many holes in the defense to sacrifice highest picks.

Given the uncertainty about the remaining length of Brady's career, and given the lead time required to develop/groom a QB in the Pats systems and schemes, I think that QB qualifies as an immediate need. I think also that the Pats will draft the QB who they feel fits best, whenever they need to based on how much interest there is from other teams in that specific prospect. That might be as early as #31, or it might be as late as #136.

 

[maineman209]

We need to draft at least one or two qb’s quickly. Let them bust and get that outta the way. Then we draft the true heir. That way some rookie doesn’t have to come and try to be the guy that takes over for Brady. Could you imagine that pressure? You’d have to have balls of steel!

Seems to me that "balls of steel" is pretty much a requirement, regardless.

 

[signbabybrady]

(A) They weren't willing to pay $22M for the franchise tag, so I'm not at all convinced they'd be willing to pay $19M for the fifth-year tender.

(B) The fifth year, right now, only matters if they expect Brady to play exactly four more seasons. Any more, and the rookie will "time out"; any less, and the team would have at least a season to decide if he's "the one."

Didn't realize the option was that high. For other positions it's generally a reasonable $ amount. Forget I said anything that first pick should be defensive, my preference being LB.

 

[oceansizer]

Immediate means to me QB who's gonna be a starter this season. Of course the best interest for the organisation is to grab a QB they like the most but I've suggested interesting prospect would be available also in late rounds. Taking one either in the first or sixth round does not guarantee a future franchise QB.