Two Major Issues Have Been Solved

[RobertWeathers]

I think that would be something that would be determined at the end of the summer, and certainly not before.

If we take a rookie RB in the draft and he looks good enough to remove two veterans from the roster, Belichick would be pleased. It would not only save money, but it would save a roster spot.

You and I seem to disagree on how to include some of the special teams only players, because Bolden obviously isn’t going to produce anything. Your proposal would actually leave us with 3 RBs: a rookie, Burkhead, and James White. I’m definitely not seeing that as much of a possibility.

BB would never start a rookie RB . He'd be too much of a liability in pass protection and audibles.

 

[The Brandon Five]

******OFFICIAL RATIONALE FOR RATING YOUR POST WITH THE DISLIKE POST RATING******

I THE UNDERSIGNED, HERETOFORE REFERENCED AS FNORD J CIRCLE, HEREBY ATTEST THE FOLLOWING REASON(S) FOR RATING YOUR PATSFANS.COM POST WITH THE DISLIKE RATING:

[X] I did not like the content
[X] I did not like the tone.
[X] I have a personal childish grudge against you that I am enacting via the post rating system
[ ] I misclicked
[X] I am trying to make you angry
[X] I am bored

PLEASE REFER ALL FURTHER INQUIRIES TO THE MODERATION TEAM.

You forgot:
[X] Ray Lewis killed a guy

 

[primetime]

I think that would be something that would be determined at the end of the summer, and certainly not before.

If we take a rookie RB in the draft and he looks good enough to remove two veterans from the roster, Belichick would be pleased. It would not only save money, but it would save a roster spot.

You and I seem to disagree on how to include some of the special teams only players, because Bolden obviously isn’t going to produce anything. Your proposal would actually leave us with 3 RBs: a rookie, Burkhead, and James White. I’m definitely not seeing that as much of a possibility.

Really depends on the rookie, as you've said. If it's Derrius Guice, then I don't see them keeping 5. If it's Chase Edmonds, then it's more probable.

I'm willing to count Bolden as a running back because unlike the Ebners, Kings, and Slaters of the world he's actually occasionally used as a running back. He's not good at it, mind you, but the others aren't even really emergency backups at their listed positions.

 

[supafly]

BB would never start a rookie RB . He'd be too much of a liability in pass protection and audibles.

I don’t think that I ever suggested any rookie starting. I’m simply bringing up the prospect of a rookie being drafted and how that could push one of Hill/Gilleslee out.

@primetime seems to suggest that it could push BOTH veterans out the door, so that’s what my comment was in response to.

 

[supafly]

Really depends on the rookie, as you've said. If it's Derrius Guice, then I don't see them keeping 5. If it's Chase Edmonds, then it's more probable.

I'm willing to count Bolden as a running back because unlike the Ebners, Kings, and Slaters of the world he's actually occasionally used as a running back. He's not good at it, mind you, but the others aren't even really emergency backups at their listed positions.

I often include Bolden in the RB grouping, as well. After all, he gets some week 16-17 carries at times.

Where I wouldn’t include him is with the group that you had listed, that’s all. I just personally disagree with going with a rookie, Bolden, White, and Burkhead—seeing as how you’d only want 4. In that case, I don’t include him as a “real” RB. I think you’d need a vet in there (Hill or Gilleslee) unless the new rookie looked superb.

 

[mgteich]

I agree. If a rookie makes the 53, we'd need to carry 5. However, I'm fine with Bulkhead, White, Bolden and Hill or Gillislie.

I often include Bolden in the RB grouping, as well. After all, he gets some week 16-17 carries at times.

Where I wouldn’t include him is with the group that you had listed, that’s all. I just personally disagree with going with a rookie, Bolden, White, and Burkhead—seeing as how you’d only want 4. In that case, I don’t include him as a “real” RB. I think you’d need a vet in there (Hill or Gilleslee) unless the new rookie looked superb.

 

[mgteich]

BB would never start a rookie RB . He'd be too much of a liability in pass protection and audibles.

I don't think a rookie would get a lot of reps, for the same reason, unless he were a top rookie.

 

[captain stone]

Interesting comment from a guy who criticizes every decision and thinks his would worked out better.

Not sure exactly what the statement above has to do with your prediction that Dion Lewis will be unavailable to Tennessee for half of their games over the next 3 seasons.

 

[maineman209]

Really depends on the rookie, as you've said. If it's Derrius Guice, then I don't see them keeping 5. If it's Chase Edmonds, then it's more probable.

I'm willing to count Bolden as a running back because unlike the Ebners, Kings, and Slaters of the world he's actually occasionally used as a running back. He's not good at it, mind you, but the others aren't even really emergency backups at their listed positions.

Guice and Edmonds are both merely prospects at this point. We have no way of knowing which one would learn the system and his assignments faster or become trusted and effective enough to push anyone off the roster by cutdowns, much less get significant snaps early in the season - or even if either could accomplish that much in their first off-season with the Pats.

You may be willing to count Bolden as an RB, but I doubt that the Pats really do. As with Slater/"WR", the positional head count and RB personnel changes that have transpired over the years haven't affected his status as a special teamer (with a "bonus talent").

OTOH, he actually has been pretty good as an RB, though he's significantly limited by the effectiveness of the team's run-blocking capabilities. In his first two seasons (2013-2013) he had 111 totes for 555 yards (4.9 ypa) and 5 TDs, and he caught 23/31 tgts for 163 yards. In 2015, with half the starting OL injured or on IR for half the season or more, he wasn't nearly as effective, though.

 

[primetime]

Guice and Edmonds are both merely prospects at this point. We have no way of knowing which one would learn the system and his assignments faster or become trusted and effective enough to push anyone off the roster by cutdowns, much less get significant snaps early in the season - or even if either could accomplish that much in their first off-season with the Pats.

You may be willing to count Bolden as an RB, but I doubt that the Pats really do. As with Slater/"WR", the positional head count and RB personnel changes that have transpired over the years haven't affected his status as a special teamer (with a "bonus talent").

OTOH, he actually has been pretty good as an RB, though he's significantly limited by the effectiveness of the team's run-blocking capabilities. In his first two seasons (2013-2013) he had 111 totes for 555 yards (4.9 ypa) and 5 TDs, and he caught 23/31 tgts for 163 yards. In 2015, with half the starting OL injured or on IR for half the season or more, he wasn't nearly as effective, though.

Right, I mean, Bolden isn't all that good, but Gillislee and Hill weren't good last year either. The Patriots have shown the willingness to use him at running back, even in situations where he isn't the only running back available. To me that suggests he belongs as a depth chart consideration at running back, unlike Slater or Ebner.

Maroney had 175 carries his rookie year compared to 199 from Dillon and Faulk and Evans chipping in another 50 combined. 175 carries would basically be replacing Lewis' workload from last season. Again, comes down to who the draftee is. But if the Patriots draft a running back in the first or second round and he's not getting 175 carries or more despite being healthy, or even splitting with the likes of Hill or Gillislee, we can probably write him off as a bust.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don’t think that I ever suggested any rookie starting. I’m simply bringing up the prospect of a rookie being drafted and how that could push one of Hill/Gilleslee out.

@primetime seems to suggest that it could push BOTH veterans out the door, so that’s what my comment was in response to.

Ah ok. My bad. Agree. A rookie runner could do that to Hill/Gill but not both.

 

[maineman209]

Right, I mean, Bolden isn't all that good, but Gillislee and Hill weren't good last year either. The Patriots have shown the willingness to use him at running back, even in situations where he isn't the only running back available. To me that suggests he belongs as a depth chart consideration at running back, unlike Slater or Ebner.

Maroney had 175 carries his rookie year compared to 199 from Dillon and Faulk and Evans chipping in another 50 combined. 175 carries would basically be replacing Lewis' workload from last season. Again, comes down to who the draftee is. But if the Patriots draft a running back in the first or second round and he's not getting 175 carries or more despite being healthy, or even splitting with the likes of Hill or Gillislee, we can probably write him off as a bust.

With the exception of 2015, when the Pats were down to accepting any RB who knew which end of the football to hold, since 2013, Bolden has only gotten occasional totes at the end of a secured win and in the last game or two of the season once the Pats had their playoff spot secured - as Slater has at WR, Ebner has at "safety" and as Grigsby did at LB in the 2017 season finale v. the Jets (Grigsby's first dozen defensive snaps of his entire NFL career). It's not as if the Pats were regularly subbing Bolden in when it mattered.

I'm extremely doubtful that the BB will draft an RB in the first or second round, and he may well not draft an RB at all, but just sign a couple UDFA instead.

It's been a dozen years since BB drafted Maroney in the first round. Since then, he's drafted only Vereen and Ridley (in the late-2nd and 3rd, respectively) - seven years ago - and James White at the end of the 4th in 2014.

Ridley saw only 87 carries as a rookie and Vereen only 15. White saw only 9. In 2017, as a rookie UDFA who made the roster, DJ Foster got 7 totes over the course of the first five games and was inactive thereafter.

BB's seeming "reluctance" to spend draft capital on the RB position since 2006 may be due to the fact that every rookie RB, not matter what round they're drafted in, comes with flaws that need to be "fixed" for them to be able to put a "complete" game on the field at an NFL-competitive level in the Pats system. Meanwhile, the pay rate, relative to the cap, for NFL-experienced RBs (for whom BB has plenty of tape to review) has declined to the point that the salary "premium" the Pats are paying for that experience has become negligible.

Gillisslee is hitting the Pats 2018 cap for $2.18M. Hill is $1.33M

- Derrick Henry, drafted at #45 in 2016, hit the Titan's cap for $984k as a rookie, and will cost $1.47M in 2018 (after two seasons of NFL experience).
- Dalvin Cook, drafted at #41 in 2017, hit the Vikes' cap for $1.16M in 2018, and will cost $1.45M in 2018 (after just one season of NFL experience).

A 2018 rookie (with zero NFL experience) who's drafted at #23 will likely hit the cap for about what Gillislee is making.

Currently, the value proposition distinctly favors RBs who have already demonstrated what they can (and cannot) accomplish at the NFL level.

 

[primetime]

With the exception of 2015, when the Pats were down to accepting any RB who knew which end of the football to hold, since 2013, Bolden has only gotten occasional totes at the end of a secured win and in the last game or two of the season once the Pats had their playoff spot secured - as Slater has at WR, Ebner has at "safety" and as Grigsby did at LB in the 2017 season finale v. the Jets (Grigsby's first dozen defensive snaps of his entire NFL career). It's not as if the Pats were regularly subbing Bolden in when it mattered.

I'm extremely doubtful that the BB will draft an RB in the first or second round, and he may well not draft an RB at all, but just sign a couple UDFA instead.

It's been a dozen years since BB drafted Maroney in the first round. Since then, he's drafted only Vereen and Ridley (in the late-2nd and 3rd, respectively) - seven years ago - and James White at the end of the 4th in 2014.

Ridley saw only 87 carries as a rookie and Vereen only 15. White saw only 9. In 2017, as a rookie UDFA who made the roster, DJ Foster got 7 totes over the course of the first five games and was inactive thereafter.

BB's seeming "reluctance" to spend draft capital on the RB position since 2006 may be due to the fact that every rookie RB, not matter what round they're drafted in, comes with flaws that need to be "fixed" for them to be able to put a "complete" game on the field at an NFL-competitive level in the Pats system. Meanwhile, the pay rate, relative to the cap, for NFL-experienced RBs (for whom BB has plenty of tape to review) has declined to the point that the salary "premium" the Pats are paying for that experience has become negligible.

Gillisslee is hitting the Pats 2018 cap for $2.18M. Hill is $1.33M

- Derrick Henry, drafted at #45 in 2016, hit the Titan's cap for $984k as a rookie, and will cost $1.47M in 2018 (after two seasons of NFL experience).
- Dalvin Cook, drafted at #41 in 2017, hit the Vikes' cap for $1.16M in 2018, and will cost $1.45M in 2018 (after just one season of NFL experience).

A 2018 rookie (with zero NFL experience) who's drafted at #23 will likely hit the cap for about what Gillislee is making.

Currently, the value proposition distinctly favors RBs who have already demonstrated what they can (and cannot) accomplish at the NFL level.

I remembered Bolden getting non-garbage rushes last season but maybe it was an illusion since it's not on his game log, and he did even less in 2016. My memory must be faulty.

I'm less convinced of the difficulty of the Patriots system on running backs. I also think Patriots fans tend to underestimate the impact a quality running back can have on a game. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Patriots take a day 1 or day 2 back in this draft. Sure, you can get a workaday guy like Gillislee for $1.5 million but you probably won't get a real stud outside the draft.

 

[Ring 6]

Not sure exactly what the statement above has to do with your prediction that Dion Lewis will be unavailable to Tennessee for half of their games over the next 3 seasons.

The irony of you, who second guesses every decision and claims what you would have done would work out better claiming I think I have a crystal ball when I point out an injury prone player will likely continue to get injured.

 

[maineman209]

I remembered Bolden getting non-garbage rushes last season but maybe it was an illusion since it's not on his game log, and he did even less in 2016. My memory must be faulty.

I'm less convinced of the difficulty of the Patriots system on running backs. I also think Patriots fans tend to underestimate the impact a quality running back can have on a game. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Patriots take a day 1 or day 2 back in this draft. Sure, you can get a workaday guy like Gillislee for $1.5 million but you probably won't get a real stud outside the draft.

Well, in week-16 v. the Bills, Bolden got some snaps and 2 carries (20 yards) after Gillislee got hurt. Gillislee was already subbing for White and Burkhead who were inactive for that game due to injuries. Then, in the week-17 finale v. the Jets, Bolden saw 9 carries (46 yards) and 4 tgts (1 catch for 7 yards) in the second half during "resting the starters mode".

Prior to that he'd only gotten a few snaps, and only 2 carries (at the end of the Pats' 41-16 blowout of the Broncos).

-----
Whether the Pats' system is unusually "difficult" or not on RBs (although there's certainly a lot for them to learn, just in pass-pro alone), I believe it's the system - and an RB's thorough grasp of it - that has enabled the Pats' "non-stud" RBs to produce stud-like games (or close enough for the Pats' purposes) with fair regularity.

There's nothing that guarantees that an RB taken in the 1st or 2nd round WILL become a "stud" in the NFL, just as there's noting that guarantees that an RB like Kareem Hunt (#86, 2017) or Jordan Howard (#150, 2016) WON'T become a stud. It's way more a matter of finding the "right guy" for the system than it is drafting a prospect early.

More importantly, how much is really to be gained from spending a high pick versus a later pick (or from spending a pick at all)?

Fournette (#4, 2017):
... 269/1040 yds, 9 TDs rushing ... 36 of 48, 302 yds, 1 TD receiving

Hunt (#86, 2017):
... 272/1327 yds, 8 TDs rushing ... 53 of 63, 455 yds, 3 TDs receiving

Jordan Howard (#150, 2016):
... 232/1313 yds, 6 TDs rushing ... 29 of 50, 298 yds, 1 TD receiving

Dion Lewis, 2017:
... 180/896 yds, 6 TDs rushing ... 23 of 35, 214 yds, 3 TDs receiving

While it's nice to think that a (potential) "stud RB" drafted in the 1st or 2nd round would make a huge difference to the Pats offense, from a cost-effectiveness perspective, it's highly unlikely.

 

[primetime]

Well, in week-16 v. the Bills, Bolden got some snaps and 2 carries (20 yards) after Gillislee got hurt. Gillislee was already subbing for White and Burkhead who were inactive for that game due to injuries. Then, in the week-17 finale v. the Jets, Bolden saw 9 carries (46 yards) and 4 tgts (1 catch for 7 yards) in the second half during "resting the starters mode".

Prior to that he'd only gotten a few snaps, and only 2 carries (at the end of the Pats' 41-16 blowout of the Broncos).

-----
Whether the Pats' system is unusually "difficult" or not on RBs (although there's certainly a lot for them to learn, just in pass-pro alone), I believe it's the system - and an RB's thorough grasp of it - that has enabled the Pats' "non-stud" RBs to produce stud-like games (or close enough for the Pats' purposes) with fair regularity.

There's nothing that guarantees that an RB taken in the 1st or 2nd round WILL become a "stud" in the NFL, just as there's noting that guarantees that an RB like Kareem Hunt (#86, 2017) or Jordan Howard (#150, 2016) WON'T become a stud. It's way more a matter of finding the "right guy" for the system than it is drafting a prospect early.

More importantly, how much is really to be gained from spending a high pick versus a later pick (or from spending a pick at all)?

Fournette (#4, 2017):
... 269/1040 yds, 9 TDs rushing ... 36 of 48, 302 yds, 1 TD receiving

Hunt (#86, 2017):
... 272/1327 yds, 8 TDs rushing ... 53 of 63, 455 yds, 3 TDs receiving

Jordan Howard (#150, 2016):
... 232/1313 yds, 6 TDs rushing ... 29 of 50, 298 yds, 1 TD receiving

Dion Lewis, 2017:
... 180/896 yds, 6 TDs rushing ... 23 of 35, 214 yds, 3 TDs receiving

While it's nice to think that a (potential) "stud RB" drafted in the 1st or 2nd round would make a huge difference to the Pats offense, from a cost-effectiveness perspective, it's highly unlikely.

I'll just admit I'm wrong (on the internet?! GASP) on Bolden, I sincerely thought he got meaningful carries early on in the season when everyone was healthy (even if it was just three or four a game), and it's clear from gamelogs he didn't even get one or two.

As for the Hunt vs. Fournette thing, you're right, but it's also remarkable for a couple reasons how successful every running back taken in the top-100 picks was last season. Fournette, McCaffrey, Hunt, Cook, and Kamara all look like studs. (Only McCaffrey has question marks in my mind... but at worst he's James White). Of the ones drafted after 100, only Aaron Jones looked like anything other than a throwaway.

 

[maineman209]

I'll just admit I'm wrong (on the internet?! GASP) on Bolden, I sincerely thought he got meaningful carries early on in the season when everyone was healthy (even if it was just three or four a game), and it's clear from gamelogs he didn't even get one or two.

As for the Hunt vs. Fournette thing, you're right, but it's also remarkable for a couple reasons how successful every running back taken in the top-100 picks was last season. Fournette, McCaffrey, Hunt, Cook, and Kamara all look like studs. (Only McCaffrey has question marks in my mind... but at worst he's James White). Of the ones drafted after 100, only Aaron Jones looked like anything other than a throwaway.

Samaje Perine, #114 WAS:
...175/603 yds, 1 TD rushing ... 22 catches/182 yds, 1 TD

Tarik Cohen, #119 CHI:
... 87/370 yds, 2 TDs rushing ... 53/353 yds, 1 TD receiving
... 29 punt ret/272 yds, 1 TD ... 26 KR/583 yds

Jamaal Williams, #134 GBY:
... 153/556, 4 TDs rushing ... 25/262, 2 TDs receiving

Wayne Gallman, #140 NYG:
... 111/476 yds rushing ... 34/193 yds, 1 TD receiving

Marlon Mack, #143 IND:
... 93/358 yds, 3 TDs rushing ... 21/225, 1 TD receiving

Aaron Jones, #182 GBY:
... 81/448, 4 TDs rushing ... 9/22 yds receiving

Elijah McGuire, #188 NYJ:
... 88/315, 1 TD rushing ... 17/177, 1 TD receiving

 

[supafly]

With the exception of 2015, when the Pats were down to accepting any RB who knew which end of the football to hold

This is where a guy like Jim Harbaugh comes in, as seen in the recent Amazon series. That man not only knows how to properly hold a football, but also knows that falling down the steps with a newborn baby in your arms is no bueno. We could’ve used that kind of common sense approach.

(I’m a Buckeyes fan )

 

[supafly]

Interesting point that I had not considered, @maineman209 in regards to the possibility of selecting cheap, experienced vets as opposed to rookie RBs. Your theory makes a lot of sense.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Patriots took a pair of Bulldogs in the first round of the 2018 NFL Draft.

After taking Georgia guard/tackle Isaiah Wynn with the 23rd overall pick, they drafted a guy he blocked for in running back Sony Michel with the 31st overall selection.

Patriots Draft Georgia Running Back Sony Michel With 31st Pick


.