What if Mac Jones and Jaylen Waddle are available at 15?

[holyredeemer]

This would be awesome. What if we replace 46 with 96(?) and a 3 next year?

I’m on the trade picks next year team as well. If we get up this year to get a qb, get a few offensive weapons this year for him to grow with in that practice field.

 

[borg]

playing behind Judy and Ruggs at Alabama is nothing to be ashamed of.

before his injury, he and smith were a deadly combo and waddle’s opened up a lot of field for smith.

at the end of the day, waddle is a monster talent and the threat of his speed and suddenness is going to open a ton of field for the other receivers, because unlike Dorset, he gets open all the time.

Pre injury...I loved this guy
Home run threat with elite cutting/separation/return skills
Mr. Versatility

Bama's pro days are this Tuesday and next Tuesday (23rd & 30th)
Curious to see how both Waddle and Jones perform

 

[Lansdowne]

Waddle is one of the top several players in the draft. You'd be insane if you didn't take him.

This board has been inundated with WR Metcalf stuff for 2 years now, and he had a million questions coming into the draft. Waddle is so polished, route running, separation, hands, run after catch, short area burst, the only reason to take Chase over him is because of an injury. One injury.

Waddle is the type of WR that can make a chucker at QB look like a league MVP.

But--this question is moot. There's no way Waddle is available at 15.

Agreed. I’m convinced most of the people saying no to Waddle are too traumatized by BB drafting the wrong guy and not looking at the fact that BB has never attempted to draft a rookie WR projected to go as high as Waddle is. I’m also convinced these detractors have never seen Waddle play.

This is not a slow, plodding WR who doesn’t get separation, or a day 2-3 guy with questionable hands. We’re talking elite talent. He is Tyreek Hill without the baggage. In the draft you go with value above need. There is no way Waddle is falling down to 15 so like you said the point is moot and nobody here has to worry about it. But IF he’s there at 15 you absolutely take him and then look at another QB prospect like Mond or Mills in the second round.

edit - I’ll concede that the one thing that needs to be monitored is Waddle having injured his ankle back in October and him limping upon his return for the championship game. I wonder how much that could effect his stock. Doesn’t seem to have an injury history prior to that and I don’t think it’ll effect him but we’ll see. Either way he won’t be a Patriot as much as I wouldn’t mind seeing it.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

If Waddle is there at 15, you pick him and don't look back. Injury is the only thing keeping him out of the top 5.

 

[Wozzy]

Most fans get tent their pants at the thought of a first round WR but Bill’s history in the first round and the history of teams making the mistake of over-drafting the position says that they won’t do in that direction with 15. QB/OL/DL/CB/LB is the way to go in the top half of the 1st, in my opinion.

Henry Ruggs was the first WR taken in last year's draft... that worked out well. And don't get me wrong, I still have belief he could work out, but every and any draft pick is a crapshoot. Chad Jackson was the best WR prospect in his draft class. By year two you usually get an idea of who these guys are, by year two N'Keal had the worst passing QB in the NFL so I'll give him a little rope.

I mostly agree with your draft order, QB/DL/CB/LB/OL though I might move OL to the back of the cue unless the best available player is sitting there. They'll only roster eight O-Linemen at most, and dress seven on game day, they're pretty deep there now. Corner could leap up to the next most important along with QB if they can't agree to an extension with Gilmore.

 

[Ivan]

Unless they think either Cam or Stidham is their qb going forward.

And that’s pretty hard to imagine. I would expect Newton to be better than last season but I seriously doubt he’s their QB if the future. That said we really have no idea what Belichick thinks of the QB prospects, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he makes a deal for Mariota before the Draft.

 

[upstater1]

Other than OL, he usually targets defense in round 1. Yes, I know that Sony and Harry are recent exceptions, but those pocks were Brady-driven, in my opinion. I can’t see him going WR at 15, unless the guy is clearly number 1 on their draft board, after the first 14 picks.

Well, he's made 10 defensive picks and 8 offensive picks in the 1st round in his 20 years here.

But going for a WR in 2019 was simply done because this football team just does not expend draft capital on WRs. At all. One of the reasons we've suffered so much is that we don't spend picks on WRs. It's the #1 reason why we don't have many good ones. Much more so than evaluating WRs (our hit rate on WRs is not far off from the league average; and it's nowhere near as bad as our hit rate on DBs, which may be the league worst).

We really need to start spending a lot more picks on WRs. Again, it's not a matter of evaluation. It's a matter of resources. We are 4 for 14 on picks in those 20 years. That's not far off the league average.

Waddle may be the next Tyreek Hill.

 

[Patsgofor4]

Well, he's made 10 defensive picks and 8 offensive picks in the 1st round in his 20 years here.

But going for a WR in 2019 was simply done because this football team just does not expend draft capital on WRs. At all. One of the reasons we've suffered so much is that we don't spend picks on WRs. It's the #1 reason why we don't have many good ones. Much more so than evaluating WRs (our hit rate on WRs is not far off from the league average; and it's nowhere near as bad as our hit rate on DBs, which may be the league worst).

We really need to start spending a lot more picks on WRs. Again, it's not a matter of evaluation. It's a matter of resources. We are 4 for 14 on picks in those 20 years. That's not far off the league average.

Waddle may be the next Tyreek Hill.

Right but 3 of those 8 were on the OL (Mankins, Solder, Wynn), which was an exception that I noted....should have written offensive skill position players....two were TEs very early on in his time on NE (Graham was 2002 and Watson 2004) and the last two were in support of Brady (the pro-Brady, anti-Bill guys on this site will dispute this but it is clearly true).

Now there may have been years that they were prepared to go with an offensive skill guy but missed out (Hopkins for example....crying emoji) but defense still seems like a much more likely bet than a WR at 15, particularly when the top 14 picks are likely to be very offense-heavy. I also think that picking in the top 15 is different than picking 28-32....Seymour, Warren, Mayo. The true impact defensive players are often found/picked in the top 15 and the Pats may not be back in that range again for the next few years (hopefully not).

On the other hand, if Bill and Josh think that Smith (more likely to drop to 15 than Waddle) is perfect for their offense and they aren’t concerned about his ability to stay healthy despite his slight frame, he may surprise me. It wouldn’t be my first choice but if they decided to go with Smith/Waddle at 15 and then trade back into round 1 to grab Collins (or Surtain/Farley if for some bizarre reason one of them slides into the 20s), I’d be fine with that.

 

[Triumph]

Their most glaring need far and away is a qb. Wr is way way way down the list.

The odds a QB at 15 playing this season are slim. Wasted pick.

 

[ashley]

Going back to the original question, I think they would take Jones....Let's see what happens during the rest of free agency.

I think whether during f/a or the draft we're going to add another receiver or two, a pass catching rb, a db, o-lineman and d-lineman. We
addressed most of our needs during f/a but the one thing that stands out is the qb position. Not sure if they like Lance or Jones better, but having someone compete against Cam during camp is going to be important. With the pieces that we've added so far, I would expect Bill to be agressive and move up if there is someone that he really likes. No need in adding extra picks and moving down if they aren't going to make the team or contribute.

 

[Triumph]

I’m okay w/Pats going WR in first round. Bill just needs to not overthink the damn thing. Take the consensus best receiver remaining if you do it. NKeal Harry was not that .

Branch and Givens.

That's it. Edelman was a QB who was developed. Mitchell was injury prone.

The rest are all terrible.

 

[upstater1]

Right but 3 of those 8 were on the OL (Mankins, Solder, Wynn), which was an exception that I noted....should have written offensive skill position players....two were TEs very early on in his time on NE (Graham was 2002 and Watson 2004) and the last two were in support of Brady (the pro-Brady, anti-Bill guys on this site will dispute this but it is clearly true).

Now there may have been years that they were prepared to go with an offensive skill guy but missed out (Hopkins for example....crying emoji) but defense still seems like a much more likely bet than a WR at 15, particularly when the top 14 picks are likely to be very offense-heavy. I also think that picking in the top 15 is different than picking 28-32....Seymour, Warren, Mayo. The true impact defensive players are often found/picked in the top 15 and the Pats may not be back in that range again for the next few years (hopefully not).

On the other hand, if Bill and Josh think that Smith (more likely to drop to 15 than Waddle) is perfect for their offense and they aren’t concerned about his ability to stay healthy despite his slight frame, he may surprise me. It wouldn’t be my first choice but if they decided to go with Smith/Waddle at 15 and then trade back into round 1 to grab Collins (or Surtain/Farley if for some bizarre reason one of them slides into the 20s), I’d be fine with that.

I just think we need to spend picks on the WR position. We shouldn't criticize their scouts or the players themselves. Other teams spend 2x as many picks as we do.

 

[fightingirish595]

I want no part of Mac Jones

 

[upstater1]

Branch and Givens.

That's it. Edelman was a QB who was developed. Mitchell was injury prone.

The rest are all terrible.

4 WRs out of the number of picks expended isn't good. But it's not far off the league average either.

Is there something about Mitchell that made his career-injury into injury prone? I thought he tore his groin to shreds.

Seriously, the Patriots have only picked 9 more WRs over the last 20 years than they've picked punters/kickers/long snappers.

 

[moosekill]

The odds a QB at 15 playing this season are slim. Wasted pick.

I am not sure if you are being serious or not. When the Patriots were favorites to win the superbowl every year, drafting a qb wasn't a need. Now they look like they are covered for this year, but really need a qb long time, going forward, so no it isn't a wasted pick, unless he sucks.

 

[Lansdowne]

This is just speculation on my part, I really don’t know what goes through Bill Belichick’s mind when he’s evaluating wide receivers. But I would guess that he factors in whether the receiver could contribute as a returner or a blocker right away. He would assess whether he thinks the receiver can learn such a complex system that requires you to know your teammates’ assignments just as well as your own. I think his criteria makes him very selective of what receiver he’d take in a draft, to his detriment. He wants to build rookies from the ground up and is probably a little harder on them than he would be signing a veteran free agent. That leads to him passing up on guys like DK Metcalf, who was considered by and large to be a very talented but very raw NFL prospect, a guy who didn’t know the whole route tree, etc. and yet ended up being an immediate impact player.

 

[Triumph]

I am not sure if you are being serious or not. When the Patriots were favorites to win the superbowl every year, drafting a qb wasn't a need. Now they look like they are covered for this year, but really need a qb long time, going forward, so no it isn't a wasted pick, unless he sucks.

15 should be used on a player who fills a hole and that can play this season.

 

[mgteich]

Both QB's and OT's should be picked even if they don't start for a year.

 

[borg]

Why in the fukedy fuk would be draft a center after we just signed a starter for 4 year and a backup for 4 mill.

If they are available at 15 hopefully that will be a tough choice for the team that has the pick after we traded up for a QB

The Andrews contract is a major surprise...... essentially a 2 yr / $6.5 mill deal
And though I can't find specifics on Karras' 1 yr deal besides the headline $4 mill, I suspect the final outlay will be substantially less.
Simply based on these nominal contracts and their longevity, drafting a center is not out of the question IMO.
With 10 draft picks and fewer holes to plug, taking a flier on a C seems a reasonable possibility.

 

[ashley]

If we do not trade up for our QB and stay put at 15, expect Bill to take an OT or CB most likely at that spot. I don't think we take WR, LB or DL with that pick.
I think the most likely scenario is that we do trade up however and get a QB( Lance or Jones).