Prediction: Unexpected first pick

I predict that BB will pick an unexpected position with his first pick.

He will draft a QB if one such as Dane Locker slips, as seems probable.
Consider the following:

1) The rosters are expanding making more room.
2) The rookie wage scale will make keeping a third QB on the squad less costly.
3) Brady is 33 and when he is 37, the new QB will be ready.
4) Belichick plans for both now and the future.
5) Belichick prefers QBs who have weathered adversity, and kept their POISE.
Examples:
Brady has to fight off Golden Boy Henson; Hoyer had to play on undermanned Michigan State against Ohio State and Michigan. Cassel had to sit behind two Heismann Trophy winners, Palmer and Leinart.
All were better for the adversity.

6) Locker has all the athletic credentials, size, height, arm strength and RB speed; but a poor team led to a poor season at Washington State.
7) Hoyer looks like a find; whether he can become a franchise QB is debatable.
8) Belichick never depends on a single player at a position, he frequently obtains a few candidates.

Nice theory but premature I think. With a few more pieces Brady and this team can be dominent for the next 3 to 4 yrs.

I'd bet my left nut against this happening. No way BB would use a first round pick for a QB who would sit behind Brady for the next 4-5 years. They might draft a developmental QB in the late rounds, but no way would they pick one in the first round.

I would choose a guy that would actually play...but that's just me

Basically, that QB would get what, $8M or so over 4 years to hold a clipboard?

i would like to add a couple of comments and counters to posters comments.

I too would like to get "someone who would play". The only position that any super rookie is likely to play is at OLB. Everywhere else the draftees will sit and learn, just like a QB. This Team is that deep.

With a rookie cap the price to carry a developing QB is a lot less than formerly, and the roster room will be there too, when the CBA expands the rosters, and puts in place a rookie scale. It is just that developing a QB properly rather than tossing him in, Sink or Swim, is 3+ years.

I think the example of both Brady and Cassel is an example of Belichick taking the appropriate time lest you ruin a guy prematurely. Brady would have won the job in his third year, if Bledsoe hadn't gone down in his mid second year, and after two training camps of learning, and one year as the designated backup, just like Hoyer is doing.

With all the draft picks that the Patriots have they have more than an ample number of high picks to draft a OLB, DE, and RB and a developmental OL.

It seems to me Belichick prefers RBBC including an ex-starter veteran.

When do you expect the Team to be drafting this low in the First Round, again? When wil they have the low draft pick and be able to pick a talent like former consensus #1 pick Dane Locker.

That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Should BB hold on to both first round picks I believe the offensive line and the dline/secondary will be addressed.

Sorry dude, but this thread is kind of ridiculous.

AzPatsFan said:

i would like to add a couple of comments and counters to posters comments.

I too would like to get "someone who would play". The only position that any super rookie is likely to play is at OLB. Everywhere else the draftees will sit and learn, just like a QB. This Team is that deep.

With a rookie cap the price to carry a developing QB is a lot less than formerly, and the roster room will be there too, when the CBA expands the rosters, and puts in place a rookie scale. It is just that developing a QB properly rather than tossing him in, Sink or Swim, is 3+ years.

I think the example of both Brady and Cassel is an example of Belichick taking the appropriate time lest you ruin a guy prematurely. Brady would have won the job in his third year, if Bledsoe hadn't gone down in his mid second year, and after two training camps of learning, and one year as the designated backup, just like Hoyer is doing.

With all the draft picks that the Patriots have they have more than an ample number of high picks to draft a OLB, DE, and RB and a developmental OL.

It seems to me Belichick prefers RBBC including an ex-starter veteran.

When do you expect the Team to be drafting this low in the First Round, again? When wil they have the low draft pick and be able to pick a talent like former consensus #1 pick Dane Locker.

Click to expand...

I understand the argument, but I'd rather have a guy who can contribute for the next few years while Brady is at his peak.

I think a rookie could contribute in a lot of areas, from OLB to DE to DB to OL (could potentially lose one or all of Light, Mankins, Neal).

As for developing a QB, it makes sense. But we're already developing Hoyer, who has done a solid job so far. The UDFA has been so solid we didn't bother getting a veteran back-up even in his rookie season. BB developed Brady from a 6th rounder to GOAT. And Matt Cassel from a 7th rounder who hadn't started since high school into one of the top 10 QBs in the league. So maybe we don't need to use a #1 pick on a QB.

BTW, Jake Locker, not Dane Locker, right?

I like the thought but Locker should not be the pick. He likes well below average and I can't even believe people rate him a 1st rounder.. He should be a late pick..

Why would we want a backup QB when we already have a good one in Hoyer? This kid has worked his tail off and could step in and win right away. He has worked side by side with the best and has been coached by the best. Wait till you see him with 2 more years of experience on his belt.

Too soon, by 2 or more years.

I do think that backup QB is more important in a (stupidly goodellian concept) 18-game season. But I believe in Hoyer.

AzPatsFan said:

With a rookie cap the price to carry a developing QB is a lot less than formerly, and the roster room will be there too, when the CBA expands the rosters, and puts in place a rookie scale. It is just that developing a QB properly rather than tossing him in, Sink or Swim, is 3+ years.

Click to expand...

Making alot of assumptions, aren't you? There is better than a 90% chance that if a rookie cap happens, it won't happen until the 2012 draft. Your other assumptions are better than 50/50 once the 18 game season happens, but they aren't relevant yet. '

As far as developing a QB over 3+ seasons, isn't that exactly what we've done with Cassel, and now Hoyer? Why waste a high pick when you can pick someone that fits your system, but has some holes, later in the draft and then take time to fix those holes?

SSDD

The owners are proposing a rookie cap due to the excessive contracts which have to be written for Top Five-Ten selections, contracts in the rest of round one don't appear to have drawn owner ire in media reports on the subject. Making that amendment to your premise, I reject the proposal that a rookie cap will substantially alter the price tag for picks 30-33 (where NE will be picking given current standings).

The next question is to ask if the price of a QB in that draft range meets with available talent? You propose Locker, fair enough, your argument is he's only slipped a round in value from preseason projections. I saw a mock draft last night from a fairly astute observer of the draft which projected Locker to Washington with their first round pick, a Top fifteen selection. You clearly have one draftnik who concurs with you as to Locker's draft value. He also had four other Quarterbacks selected before Locker, a total of five in the Top fifteen in his mock - once the underclassmen declare it just may be that Locker (in this valuation) is pushed down to the end of the first round. I accept your valuation of Locker as a working premise.

Using your premise of an unexpected selection, I look to NE drafting history under BB to see if there is any indicator that he might jump your way.
-- Mankins? A surprise to many, and not a second pick, but within the selection range we are using. Yet, he replaced a departing starter.
-- McCourty? Also a surprise to many, he also replaced a departing starter too (even if we didn't see it at the time).
-- Watson? He more closely fits your profile of a second high pick used on a replacement to be groomed. Ignoring the controversy surrounding Ben's career here, his addition looks in hindsight very similar to the 2010 draft class and the current offensive strategic picture (Graham, Fauria, & Watson compared to Crumpler, Gronkowski, and Hernandez).
-- Wilfork? He replaced a starter too.
-- O'Connell? He was a third, but a second pick in the round and a raw QB to boot, very similar to your theory.

It seems BB does have an eccentric enough drafting history to support your premise.

How might his economics background affect your proposal?
-- Young QB to groom, heir to an empire. Ecomonically speaking the idea of training a Crown Prince makes good sense.
-- Price tag for a Crown Prince as compared to upgrades/repairs to the castle wall (OL/DL/OLB)? If the current castle wall is still adequate to the task, your premise isn't too unreasonable, if there are holes to fill (Deadrick suspended, Neal retired, Mankins and/or Light departed, Gerard Warren lured away) your premise looses urgency. How about an upgrade/replacement for other needs of your empire? Border security, highway safety, etc.? Are your RB, CB, S, ILB, WR, TE adequate to the task? Would they be better for an upgrade or would QB?
-- Frugality? Now this one pinches those pennies you are proposing to spend. Frugality would argue, as other critics of your plan suggest, that 30-33 is better spent on upgrading another position with a more immediate return on investment. You might argue this is more greed than frugality, but I would suggest your proposal could be argued as more greed than frugality too.
-- Trade? Before mocking Locker to NE in the 30-33 range, we might want to consider the trade potential; those teams picking 34-45 are QB needy teams who would be very interested in Locker and willing to trade up into the first round to get him for five years vice four. I offer a counter proposal to you for a trade back with one those teams ... do you still want Locker who will likely languish on the scout team for the length of his contract?

I conclude your premise has precedent and Locker is a reasonable projection; yet between the immediate value to the team of another brick in the wall or upgraded border security I have doubts as to the economy of your proposal. You propose a late first for a raw, mobile QB with all the physical tools, I propose a raw Day Three QB with all the physical tools:
-- Colin Kaepernick, Nevada, Rd 4 projection, 6-6/225
-- T.J. Yates, North Carolina, Rd 7, 6-3/220
-- Scott Tolzien, Wisconsin, Rd 7-FA, 6-2/208
-- Adam Weber, Minnesota, FA, 6-1/221
-- Ben Chappell, Indiana, FA, 6-2/242
-- Adam Froman, Louisville FA, 6-4/220
-- Justin Burke, Louisville, FA, 6-3/229

If you are looking to develop a future starter, and your time frame is based on Brady's expected career which gives you a four to five year window of opportunity, I'm less inclined to spend a late first for Jake Locker when I could get an Adam Froman or Justin Burke, or both for free agency prices. After observing this college season, I'd give Froman or Burke a shot to develop behind Brady before I'd offer it to Locker. Call me frugi- ... okay, cheap.

p.s. The college QB whom I consider the most Brady-like: Kellen Moore, Boise State, who is currently projected to Day Three in 2012 due to his height and laser rocket arm shortfall.

Is now the time to flip Hoyer for a draft pick and start developing the next back-up?

There`s a lot of need out there for QB`s.

ayjackson said:

Is now the time to flip Hoyer for a draft pick and start developing the next back-up?

There`s a lot of need out there for QB`s.

Click to expand...

I'm sure viable offers will be considered, but I'm setting the price high.

Box_O_Rocks said:

p.s. The college QB whom I consider the most Brady-like: Kellen Moore, Boise State, who is currently projected to Day Three in 2012 due to his height and laser rocket arm shortfall.

Click to expand...

For those of us who seek enlightenment: what makes Mr. Moore so Brady-like?

If we used a 2nd round or later pick on a QB, then their contract will expire before or at the same time as Tom Brady's.

If we use a 1st round pick on a QB, then their contract will expire one year after Tom Brady's.

Either way, it's ridiculously premature to draft his replacement.

If you're talking about our very first pick, we're looking about a $20 million contract. You'd be paying $20 million for the possibility of one year of starting play, which would, in effect, be that player's rookie year.

That's crazytalk.

Box_O_Rocks said:

I conclude your premise has precedent and Locker is a reasonable projection; yet between the immediate value to the team of another brick in the wall or upgraded border security I have doubts as to the economy of your proposal. You propose a late first for a raw, mobile QB with all the physical tools, I propose a raw Day Three QB with all the physical tools:
-- Colin Kaepernick, Nevada, Rd 4 projection, 6-6/225
-- T.J. Yates, North Carolina, Rd 7, 6-3/220
-- Scott Tolzien, Wisconsin, Rd 7-FA, 6-2/208
-- Adam Weber, Minnesota, FA, 6-1/221
-- Ben Chappell, Indiana, FA, 6-2/242
-- Adam Froman, Louisville FA, 6-4/220
-- Justin Burke, Louisville, FA, 6-3/229

Click to expand...

There are two types of teams in the NFL, those with a franchise QB and those without a franchise QB.

I think BB needs to keep drafting/ signing UDFA QBs and continue to coach them up to keep some talent in the pipeline.

I love Kaepernick (the pistol offense may have hurt his college development substantally), but in the 6th or 7th round, NOT in the 4th round.

ctpatsfan77 said:

For those of us who seek enlightenment: what makes Mr. Moore so Brady-like?

Click to expand...

Poise, control of the offense, anticipation, accuracy, toughness, ... it's a lot like watching a southpaw mini-me version of Brady reading defenses and picking them apart. He may not have the physical tools to be a franchise QB, but who knows, it's not like the kid is a stranger to winning.