Another unfortunate scenario?

[Thelonious]

I'd love to say, given the obscene breadth of need on this crap roster, that we should veer heavily in the direction of simply choosing the best player with each pick. Aside from QB - presumably - whatever position you draft will be a position of need. The team is that bad.

But I think the urgent and critical need to get at least a competent LT makes that irresponsible. I would propose that they get a competent LT, in the draft or otherwise FIRST, then draft the best player with each pick from there on out.

 

[PlainOldEd]

If they choose Sanders BB will be the next NY Giants HC/GM in a couple of years.

If they choose Sanders, Dion will convince them that he is the solution and he will be coach next year

 

[FredFromDartmouth]

Pats forums… the only place a top five draft pick could be la considered “unfortunate.”

Neither Carter or Hunter are that transcendent, or much better than the players around them in the top ten.

I agree. Remember the hype around Marvin Harrison Jr. He was supposed to be a transcendent talent. One-in-a-generation WR. [Why does it seem that there is a once-in-a-generation prospect every year?]

Carter is no Lawrence Taylor, but, heck, I would sure love to see Travis Hunter as a Patriot, but it ain't gonna happen thanks to a coach that was so incompetent that he could not even lose when he was supposed to.

Thursday night cannot get here soon enough, but for a lot of Pats fans like us, the night will end around 9:00 when the Patriots pick Will Campbell. I am OK with that, but the other scenarios are so much more exciting (and dangerous).

 

[Triumph]

I agree. Remember the hype around Marvin Harrison Jr. He was supposed to be a transcendent talent. One-in-a-generation WR. [Why does it seem that there is a once-in-a-generation prospect every year?]

Carter is no Lawrence Taylor, but, heck, I would sure love to see Travis Hunter as a Patriot, but it ain't gonna happen thanks to a coach that was so incompetent that he could not even lose when he was supposed to.

Thursday night cannot get here soon enough, but for a lot of Pats fans like us, the night will end around 9:00 when the Patriots pick Will Campbell. I am OK with that, but the other scenarios are so much more exciting (and dangerous).

How many HOF Father NFL players had sons that were as good or better?

The Longs were good I suppose.

 

[PlainOldEd]

How many HOF Father NFL players had sons that were as good or better?

The Longs were good I suppose.

Archie and Peyton? (College HOF anyways)

 

[Triumph]

Archie and Peyton? (College HOF anyways)

Archie was kinda like Plunkett on a bad team and hung out to dry.

Plunkett eventually went on to win 2 Lomabardis and Archie faded away.

 

[NFL Mystique]

My solution was Patriots trade up with the Browns or the Giants.

Imagine The Giants selling yes they drafted Sanders but moved down 1 spot and got a extra third or I hope not but a Second or a extra pick next season as well.

We are def greatly impacted by the Browns and Giants decisions.
Unless we are content on grabbing a game breaking RB, our choice of Tackle. Adding the second pass rusher on our board or trading down for more picks.

The draft will be entertaining very much so way.

To be honest, this might be the most uninteresting draft in years. The # 1 QB prospect Ward is rated as a nice starter on nfl.com. Basically a 15-20 QB in the league.

The Patriots shouldn't trade picks. They need to stay put and draft the best player available.

 

[NormZauchin]

I'd love to say, given the obscene breadth of need on this crap roster, that we should veer heavily in the direction of simply choosing the best player with each pick. Aside from QB - presumably - whatever position you draft will be a position of need. The team is that bad.

But I think the urgent and critical need to get at least a competent LT makes that irresponsible. I would propose that they get a competent LT, in the draft or otherwise FIRST, then draft the best player with each pick from there on out.

The best player available is not always easy to compute. I think you have to take into account the quality of the player currently on the roster who will be replaced by the draft pick, the importance of the position, and the likelihood that should you pass over a position of great need, like LT for the Pats, that the next year you can acquire someone as good or better than the player passed over for the BPA.

 

[TommyD4207]

I agree. Remember the hype around Marvin Harrison Jr. He was supposed to be a transcendent talent. One-in-a-generation WR. [Why does it seem that there is a once-in-a-generation prospect every year?]

Carter is no Lawrence Taylor, but, heck, I would sure love to see Travis Hunter as a Patriot, but it ain't gonna happen thanks to a coach that was so incompetent that he could not even lose when he was supposed to.

Thursday night cannot get here soon enough, but for a lot of Pats fans like us, the night will end around 9:00 when the Patriots pick Will Campbell. I am OK with that, but the other scenarios are so much more exciting (and dangerous).

He would have been the Patriots leading receiver last year. Not bad for a rookie.

 

[XLIX]

He would have been the Patriots leading receiver last year. Not bad for a rookie.

Kyler Murray still sucks and Arizona used him very poorly. He is an even better player than his stats indicate. I'd take him here in a heartbeat.

 

[Thelonious]

The best player available is not always easy to compute. I think you have to take into account the quality of the player currently on the roster who will be replaced by the draft pick, the importance of the position, and the likelihood that should you pass over a position of great need, like LT for the Pats, that the next year you can acquire someone as good or better than the player passed over for the BPA.

You are more likely to get the better player if your evaluation is based on "Who is the best player?" than if you ask "who is the best OT?" (for example.). In any case, as I said, the approach of drafting for need is a far less compelling option when positional need is rendered less critical by the fact that you have needs at virtually every position. Many here presume to evaluate what the team ought to do without facing the fact that Belichick/Wolf ran this roster into the ground, so that the roster is still complete crap, and whatever position you draft, with few if any exceptions, will fill an "area of need."

 

[john4psu]

I can remember the Steelers drafting Notre Dame's Terry Hanratty early and proceeding to go 1-13 - then drafting Terry Bradshaw the very next year with the #1 overall pick. Worked out for Pittsburgh, but not for Hanratty - he never got another chance to start, spending the rest of his career holding a clipboard.

Excellent memory. Very true.

 

[Spiral]

If the Giants don't take Sanders, then I think the Pats should auction off #4 to whichever team wants Jeanty the most.