[QUOTE=DaBruinz;812517][I]Here is your problem. You think that a 4-3 OLB = a 3-4 OLB. It doesn't. A 4-3 DE is much closer in responsibilities to a 3-4 OLB.[/i]
If that's the case then Groves is the best fit because he was a 4-3 Rush end at Auburn with some OLB/ILB. Long was strictly a 3-4 DE who has got to transition to OLB in the 3-4 which Al Groh says he will do fine but wasn't used that way and has yet to be proven. So according to your statement Groves would transition better than Long if a "4-3 DE is closer in responsibilities to a 3-4 OLB".
Actually, according to reports, Groves STUNK as a 3-4 OLB and is best suited to a 4-3 DE position.
Now, your little trade scenario makes no sense. First, you mention trading the Pats pick for a later 1st, a 2nd this year and a 1st next year, but then you talk about getting only 2 players. Which is it. Two players or Three?
Actually it makes perfect sense because you don't know what the Pats could trade #7 for or what they want so it would be either 2 or 3 picks. That's pretty simple actually if you weren't trying to be such a smart arse you would comprehend.
I comprehend things just fine when they are written properly. You start off by talking about trading #7 for 3 picks, but then only talk about getting two players total. You don't make it an option in your post. If you weren't trying to show respected posters (PonyExpress) how much smarter you are than them, you might actually have something to offer. Right now, your a loudmouthed know nothing who has his binkie in Quentin Groves and you don't like Chris long.
Besides the point was (if you read the whole conversation) that the Pats would in order to pick Long or Gholston at #7 and (say they had a trade offer)
would they think Long or Gholston is more value at #7 then 2 or 3 players one which could be a Groves and the poster felt Long is more talented then our entire defense but couldn't tell me they value Long that much. And you can't tell me that neither.
I've read the whole conversation, thank you very much. You should stop making an arse of yourself by making all these assumptions about other people. You might hve more to offer if you did that. But I doubt it.
Now, the Point of the conversation was NOT whether people think Long or Gholston have more value than a trade. That might have been your point, which you haven't presented very well at all. The point of the conversation, as seen by the title, was people talking about Chris Long and his Combine results and where he fits in the draft now.
The poster felt that Long has more talent than any current player on the Patriots roster. You've done NOTHING to show that his opinion is wrong. That's his opinion and he's entitled to it.
Personally, I want the Patriots to trade down, picking up as many extra picks as possible so they can address as many holes as possible with the talent that they have rated highly on their draft board. However, if they can't trade down, and Chris Long were there, then it would seem like a no-brainer to take him.
What makes you think that Groves will easily make the change into a 3-4 OLB from playing a 4-3 OLB position?
You proved my point on Groves if you cared to look up Auburns All-Time leader in sacks like sebman posted or watched film on Groves for his Auburn career. I know you don't have access to the coach's film tape so your just giving your opinion because you like Long and have your heart set on him. It's cool.
Actually, I didn't prove your point on Groves. But you can believe whatever your deluded little heart desires. Its clear Groves is your binkie and that you have your heart set on the Patriots drafting him.
As for liking Long, I don't have a strong opinion on him one way or the other. I just take issue with nobodies like yourself thinking that they are all high and mighty and such going off on posters here who actually know something.
