Everyone Seems VERY Happy With This Draft So Far

zydecochris · May 2, 2019

Mike the Brit said:
Thank you for the kind words, Chris (appreciated if not deserved).

I'm still a bit bemused by the pick. The easiest way to explain it is to look at three things.

1. Quality of the player Thanks for your information there. I'm a Pats fan first, so I'm primed to buy into the optimism. Would it be fair to say that the hope is "First round player for third round cost" and that he could be on a level with Sony M?

2. Fit with the rest of the roster Here's where the doubt kicks in. It looks like the Pats will have an RB rota of Michel, Harris, White, Burkhead, Bolden. I don't think it's reasonable to see Harris as displacing either White or Burkhead, although perhaps they expect him to displace Bolden on Special Teams. I do think that the fit looks much stronger if the Pats hadn't drafted Michel last year, but, say, had kept LG Blount, or if Hill had stayed health. The injuries last year were exceptional both in number (Hill, Michel and Burkhead -- 3 of 4 running backs -- out for significant periods) and impact (having to keep Michel on the roster because IR-to-return was already occupied).

3. Opportunity Cost I'm no draft expert, so I don't have a player I'm burning with frustration the Pats didn't draft. But I will say that, if you're going to take a flyer with a 4th-rounder on a possible quarterback of the future, it wouldn't have cost so much more to go up to the 2nd and trade for Josh Rosen, who looks to me like a better prospect than Stidham.

Anyway, thanks for the info and welcome to New England, Mr Harris.

Regarding his fit with the rest of the roster, IMHO a major priority of the Patriots and Josh McD for the last few years has been to find a RB that is extremely productive in BOTH the running and passing / pass protection game and could stay on the field. Mike Lombardi has mentioned that is why the Pats didn't retain Blount, when he was in the game a good defense knew it was a run and they could key on the run (e.g., with a run blitz), and thus in big games the Pats became one dimensional with everything on Brady's shoulders. With Lewis, although he was a decent (not fantastic) receiver he was also primarily a running option because he was a liability in pass protection, and he was often injured. So: to try to get someone that was versatile in both the run and the pass they brought in Gillislee and Burkhead, but Gillislee didn't pan out in the passing game at all and he was out-produced in the running game by Lewis in 2017 (when Lewis avoided major injury). Burkhead probably was the closest the Patriots had to a true run/pass option player, but he also really had trouble avoiding injury. I think they drafted Michael in the 1st round to finally be that true threat on both running plays and passing plays, but despite his extremely promising year he wasn't as much of a factor in the passing game as one might have expected from his college career, and he had a bit of trouble avoiding injury also. I am hopeful that Michael blossoms in the passing game this year.

So: I think the Harris role will be: i) a primary option in short yardage; ii) to share running carries with Michael so that Michael isn't worn down or injured, he isn't as dynamic as Michael but he is a very smart, reliable RB who is far more talented that anyone other than Micheal in the running game; iii) he will replace Burkhead as a more talented dual threat in both the passing and running game.

I actually think that Harris will be the primary option in the red zone this year, because he is a strong between the tackle runner, he is an extremely strong pass protector, and he will be a very reliable drop off option for Brady. Is he as good of a receiver as White? No, but when White is in the defense knows it will be a pass, and that won't be the case with Harris. Just my opinion (says the guy who posted all of the reasons that the Patriots absolutely would not draft Stidham)

captain stone · May 3, 2019

zydecochris said:
...Just my opinion (says the guy who posted all of the reasons that the Patriots absolutely would not draft Stidham)

Nor should they have.

patfanken · May 3, 2019

I'm STILL not happy about some aspects of this draft. So allow me this last rant so I can vent whatever angst still remains.

1. I have come to grips with the Harry pick. All the obvious DL guys were gone, and 2 teams that traded up got deals with teams ahead of the Pats, so its likely there wasn't much they could do about trading down. If this guy was at the top of their board then I'm good with it, even though its at a position I don't value much, it was a need. My only concern is that we didn't add a SPEED WR to stretch the field.

2. Again you can't get too many big CB's who can "flip their hips". I'm not thrilled we had to give up a 3rd round pick to move up 11 spots, but that's beyond my pay grade, I don't have a chart.

3. Winovich FINALLY gives us some more defensive help on the DL. His best match seems to be a potential Ninko replacement. If he can get to that level of play, this was a great pick. It looks good so far.

4. Harris is a good player but a luxury in a crowded RB room. Warring was available around that point and could have had a much greater immediate impact than Harris. And if you wanted a "bigger" RB type, I'm guessing it could have been found later on.

5. The Cajueste pick is one I completely understand though I never understood the hand wringing about the lack of a swing tackle. Cajuste is a decent prospect for that role to start although there are injury concerns. And btw there are still several good vet FA's would would be capable to fill that role for this season.

6. And here is where it comes off the rails for me. The Great Dane was a completely redundant pick. Don't tell me about Thuney's likely demise next year. So WHAT, did I miss the memo that stated interior offensive lineman will NOT be available in the 2020 draft (where, BTW we will have around 13 picks). Foster Mareau was there to be had. Not the best TE prospect that was available, but one that fit so many Patriot boxes that he would have helped much more than a very redundant OG here. Wasted pick who may actually be good down the road, but so might have the OG they pick next year or later. We NEEDED a TE, and decent prospect was there.

7. Stidham was a good pick at that spot. Especially since I don't have a specific pick I would have rather had. Its a pick that likely wouldn't have been there later. He's a kid that would have been a first rounder coming out last year, but took a step back this season. If he can oust Hoyer as the back up, the pick will be an immediate home run. If he can't I will hate the fact they will have to carry 3 QB's when they have so many DB's to fit in. But in general I have no problem with this pick. I'm looking forward to seeing him in TC

8 I like the Cowart pick a lot. At that point in the draft going for players with high ceilings but low floors is a good strategy. Shoot for the stars....and they did.

9. A punter??????? and having to move UP for a punter. GIVE me a break! And again don't give me that crap about Allen being on a one year contract. He's a guy who has proven to be a capable guy in the highest pressure games. He's also a VERY good holder which shouldn't be underestimated. And we felt we had to spend draft capital to get this kid.

Now I don't know who they might have drafted instead of this kid, but my guess is that ANYONE they picked would have had a chance to be more of an impact than a spare PUNTER. Again, was there a memo that stated no punters could be draft NEXT year. The ONLY way they can justify this pick is if he beats out someone who has been VERY good at his job his entire career. The real headscratcher pick of this draft

10. Sorry Ken. You have a great first name, and someday you may be an all pro, but at this point I stopped caring who we drafted or who we signed as UDFA's for that matter, even though one of those guys will likely make the team. Good luck and welcome aboard.

....and I'm done.

tasmlab · May 3, 2019

Quest4SixHomie said:
How? Their QB isn't Nick Foles anymore. And we can't embarrass them without Gronk. They didn't play scared against us in the Super Bowl. They're not the Rams.

Just like the Giants, we're going to live this down forever. Eagles fans will make sure to remind us.

Pats beat the Eagles in a super bowl too.

zydecochris · May 3, 2019

captain stone said:
Nor should they have.

Well, I guess we will see. I had previously made the argument that he didn't really fit the profile of a Patriots QB draft pick. After a strong 2017 season where Stidham played very well and Auburn (who beat both Alabama and Georgia) barely missed out on the College Football Championship playoffs, he went into 2018 with great expectations and with Auburn ranked number 8th in the pre-season. But, Auburn had a poor 2018 season (at least to the Auburn fans and their sky high expectations) and lost 5 games, and Stidham seemed to really regress and even lose confidence. Although the Auburn Head Coach seems pretty good (although many would disagree), they did change the Offensive Coordinator part way through the season, so conceivably some of the problem could have been coaching.

Anyway, that doesn't seem like the normal QB profile the Pats would draft, but I guess the only real BB drafting profile is value, and they must have felt he was a good value in the 4th. We'll see.

captain insano · May 4, 2019

Dingleberry · May 4, 2019

Regarding the supposed redundancy of picking a RB with our crowded backfield...

Does anyone really expect to get 16 games out of Michel or Burkhead? Lose one of them, and Harris is no longer a luxury. Lose both of them, and Harris is a lifesaver.

SHOWTIME15 · May 4, 2019

tasmlab said:
Pats beat the Eagles in a super bowl too.

He’s probably a new fan...

BelichicksHoodie · May 4, 2019

With the way the league is going, pure speed WRs are becoming redundant. Teams are playing 2 safeties deep more than ever now with the sudden surge of the spread offense to the point where it's getting harder and harder to beat teams over the top. I'd take a solid route runner and sure handed third down receiver over a guy who can run go-routes all day. And considering who our QB is, I highly doubt anyone on our coaching staff is expecting consistent 60 yard bombs from Brady in his mid-40s....

Ivan · May 4, 2019

Dingleberry said:
Regarding the supposed redundancy of picking a RB with our crowded backfield...

Does anyone really expect to get 16 games out of Michel or Burkhead? Lose one of them, and Harris is no longer a luxury. Lose both of them, and Harris is a lifesaver.

Right on the money, they had to use Patterson back there last season. Harris was a need, not a luxury.

Danger Zone · May 5, 2019

Dingleberry said:
Regarding the supposed redundancy of picking a RB with our crowded backfield...

Does anyone really expect to get 16 games out of Michel or Burkhead? Lose one of them, and Harris is no longer a luxury. Lose both of them, and Harris is a lifesaver.

I remember when four years ago we had a plethora of RBs. Dion Lewis. Blount. Bolden. Jackson. James White. Too many. Way too many! Odd man out? Why James White of course.

Imagine if the armchair GMs had had their way that year.

supafly · May 5, 2019

Mike the Brit said:
The injuries last year were exceptional both in number (Hill, Michel and Burkhead -- 3 of 4 running backs -- out for significant periods) and impact (having to keep Michel on the roster because IR-to-return was already occupied).

I think the decision to keep Michel on the active roster in the beginning of Sept. was simply due to the fact that he was close to playing, rather than IR-D being full. After all, he played in week two.

50-yard-line · May 5, 2019

patfanken said:
I'm STILL not happy about some aspects of this draft. So allow me this last rant so I can vent whatever angst still remains.

1. I have come to grips with the Harry pick. All the obvious DL guys were gone, and 2 teams that traded up got deals with teams ahead of the Pats, so its likely there wasn't much they could do about trading down. If this guy was at the top of their board then I'm good with it, even though its at a position I don't value much, it was a need. My only concern is that we didn't add a SPEED WR to stretch the field.

2. Again you can't get too many big CB's who can "flip their hips". I'm not thrilled we had to give up a 3rd round pick to move up 11 spots, but that's beyond my pay grade, I don't have a chart.

3. Winovich FINALLY gives us some more defensive help on the DL. His best match seems to be a potential Ninko replacement. If he can get to that level of play, this was a great pick. It looks good so far.

4. Harris is a good player but a luxury in a crowded RB room. Warring was available around that point and could have had a much greater immediate impact than Harris. And if you wanted a "bigger" RB type, I'm guessing it could have been found later on.

5. The Cajueste pick is one I completely understand though I never understood the hand wringing about the lack of a swing tackle. Cajuste is a decent prospect for that role to start although there are injury concerns. And btw there are still several good vet FA's would would be capable to fill that role for this season.

6. And here is where it comes off the rails for me. The Great Dane was a completely redundant pick. Don't tell me about Thuney's likely demise next year. So WHAT, did I miss the memo that stated interior offensive lineman will NOT be available in the 2020 draft (where, BTW we will have around 13 picks). Foster Mareau was there to be had. Not the best TE prospect that was available, but one that fit so many Patriot boxes that he would have helped much more than a very redundant OG here. Wasted pick who may actually be good down the road, but so might have the OG they pick next year or later. We NEEDED a TE, and decent prospect was there.

7. Stidham was a good pick at that spot. Especially since I don't have a specific pick I would have rather had. Its a pick that likely wouldn't have been there later. He's a kid that would have been a first rounder coming out last year, but took a step back this season. If he can oust Hoyer as the back up, the pick will be an immediate home run. If he can't I will hate the fact they will have to carry 3 QB's when they have so many DB's to fit in. But in general I have no problem with this pick. I'm looking forward to seeing him in TC

8 I like the Cowart pick a lot. At that point in the draft going for players with high ceilings but low floors is a good strategy. Shoot for the stars....and they did.

9. A punter??????? and having to move UP for a punter. GIVE me a break! And again don't give me that crap about Allen being on a one year contract. He's a guy who has proven to be a capable guy in the highest pressure games. He's also a VERY good holder which shouldn't be underestimated. And we felt we had to spend draft capital to get this kid.

Now I don't know who they might have drafted instead of this kid, but my guess is that ANYONE they picked would have had a chance to be more of an impact than a spare PUNTER. Again, was there a memo that stated no punters could be draft NEXT year. The ONLY way they can justify this pick is if he beats out someone who has been VERY good at his job his entire career. The real headscratcher pick of this draft

10. Sorry Ken. You have a great first name, and someday you may be an all pro, but at this point I stopped caring who we drafted or who we signed as UDFA's for that matter, even though one of those guys will likely make the team. Good luck and welcome aboard.

....and I'm done.

Well, Ken, the only thing I can tell you is that I expect that Pats fans on message boards during this off-season heard more about tight ends than any other position, due to certain circumstances. You keep hearing names, they naturally sound better and better to you, so guys like Warring and Oliver become more appealing.

LaCosse and Beck both showed athleticism with any of the TEs this year other than Hock and Fant (and to a lesser degree, Smith). The UDFA the Pats signed was right there with them.

Is it possible that the TE class, below the top two, was just a bunch of guys WE grew more familiar with because we happen to need a TE, and thus overvalued? I have to believe that's how the Pats viewed the class, particularly since some of those names we came to know well were on the board when they picked someone to challenge their punter.

I don't think very many TEs come into the league and make an immediate major impact, by the way. In fact, there are only a couple of TEs in the league who are game-changers. Three TEs had 1000+ and a couple more over 700 yards last year, and other than Kittle, none of them are very good blockers.

We're used to watching the most dominant TE ever to play - on his game, everyone else is a distant second to Gronk. Truth is, there just aren't many TE "difference makers" out there, even ones who came highly-rated out of college.

Froob · May 5, 2019

@patfanken

"5. The Cajueste pick is one I completely understand though I never understood the hand wringing about the lack of a swing tackle. Cajuste is a decent prospect for that role to start although there are injury concerns. And btw there are still several good vet FA's would would be capable to fill that role for this season.

6. And here is where it comes off the rails for me. The Great Dane was a completely redundant pick. Don't tell me about Thuney's likely demise next year. So WHAT, did I miss the memo that stated interior offensive lineman will NOT be available in the 2020 draft (where, BTW we will have around 13 picks). Foster Mareau was there to be had. Not the best TE prospect that was available, but one that fit so many Patriot boxes that he would have helped much more than a very redundant OG here. Wasted pick who may actually be good down the road, but so might have the OG they pick next year or later. We NEEDED a TE, and decent prospect was there."

I gotta disagree with your takes here. That Bills Monday nighter is a textbook example of needed quality depth on the line. Waddle single handedly destroyed our offense. Scar can usually develop a tackle in two years. It's good to get ahead of it. Plus, Cannon could easily be one concussion (or some other injury, he's been hurt a lot) away from being retired. Plus, Wynn is coming back from a horrible injury, he may not be ready to start the season.

We'll need a guard when Thuney likely leaves like you said, better to groom him ahead of time.

Patsgofor4 · May 5, 2019

Mike the Brit said:
Thank you for the kind words, Chris (appreciated if not deserved).

I'm still a bit bemused by the pick. The easiest way to explain it is to look at three things.

1. Quality of the player Thanks for your information there. I'm a Pats fan first, so I'm primed to buy into the optimism. Would it be fair to say that the hope is "First round player for third round cost" and that he could be on a level with Sony M?

2. Fit with the rest of the roster Here's where the doubt kicks in. It looks like the Pats will have an RB rota of Michel, Harris, White, Burkhead, Bolden. I don't think it's reasonable to see Harris as displacing either White or Burkhead, although perhaps they expect him to displace Bolden on Special Teams. I do think that the fit looks much stronger if the Pats hadn't drafted Michel last year, but, say, had kept LG Blount, or if Hill had stayed health. The injuries last year were exceptional both in number (Hill, Michel and Burkhead -- 3 of 4 running backs -- out for significant periods) and impact (having to keep Michel on the roster because IR-to-return was already occupied).

3. Opportunity Cost I'm no draft expert, so I don't have a player I'm burning with frustration the Pats didn't draft. But I will say that, if you're going to take a flyer with a 4th-rounder on a possible quarterback of the future, it wouldn't have cost so much more to go up to the 2nd and trade for Josh Rosen, who looks to me like a better prospect than Stidham.

Anyway, thanks for the info and welcome to New England, Mr Harris.

If Michel, God forbid, misses extensive time with an injury next year we will all be very thankful for the Harris pick because neither Burkhead nor White can be counted on to carry the load on first and second downs for more than a handful of games.

Also, the Pats have the inside scoop on Michel’s knee. Perhaps it is worse than they realized and they feel that Michel’s reps need to be managed. Teams cannot have “too much” running back depth given the rate at which RBs get injured in the league and his versatility as a three down back who was one of the better past protecting backs in the draft may end up being important for them as soon as next year.

From listening to Caserio’s Day 2 recap, it seemed pretty clear that they picked him because the top rated player left on their board, likely by a significant margin, even if he did not represent one of the teams top “needs”.

SBLIII · May 5, 2019

Patsgofor4 said:
From listening to Caserio’s Day 2 recap, it seemed pretty clear that they picked him because the top rated player left on their board, likely by a significant margin, even if he did not represent one of the teams top “needs”.

That seems to be the most likely scenario why he was picked. He was projected as a fringe 1st rounder a year ago while his production did not drop off and he did not get injured.

Patsgofor4 · May 5, 2019

Froob said:
@patfanken

"5. The Cajueste pick is one I completely understand though I never understood the hand wringing about the lack of a swing tackle. Cajuste is a decent prospect for that role to start although there are injury concerns. And btw there are still several good vet FA's would would be capable to fill that role for this season.

6. And here is where it comes off the rails for me. The Great Dane was a completely redundant pick. Don't tell me about Thuney's likely demise next year. So WHAT, did I miss the memo that stated interior offensive lineman will NOT be available in the 2020 draft (where, BTW we will have around 13 picks). Foster Mareau was there to be had. Not the best TE prospect that was available, but one that fit so many Patriot boxes that he would have helped much more than a very redundant OG here. Wasted pick who may actually be good down the road, but so might have the OG they pick next year or later. We NEEDED a TE, and decent prospect was there."

While I do appreciate cI gotta disagree with your takes here. That Bills Monday nighter is a textbook example of needed quality depth on the line. Waddle single handedly destroyed our offense. Scar can usually develop a tackle in two years. It's good to get ahead of it. Plus, Cannon could easily be one concussion (or some other injury, he's been hurt a lot) away from being retired. Plus, Wynn is coming back from a horrible injury, he may not be ready to start the season.

We'll need a guard when Thuney likely leaves like you said, better to groom him ahead of time.

How many times does Bill have to tell people that they don’t draft for need before they will start to listen? If the Pats had a 3rd round grade on Froholdt (I know that they don’t grade by around but for demonstration purposes...), based in part upon the recommendation of one of the all-time great offensive line coaches, and a 4th/5th round grade on Mareau, you want them to pick the significantly lower rated player because he has a name that you recognize and it is an area of great need in 2019?

If the reports are true that they only had 75 to 100 draftable players on their board, it is entirely possible Mareau was not even on their board and it is highly unlikely he would have been a difference maker as a rookie. It also seems possible, if not likely, that they feel that one or more of their current veteran tight ends can offer more production than Mareau or any of the 2nd/3rd tier tight ends in this years draft. Give me a 5 to 10 years starting guard over an average to above average NFL tight end with mainly special-teams value, which is likely the fate of most of the TEs in this year’s draft.

TommyD4207 · May 7, 2019

Patsgofor4 said:
If Michel, God forbid, misses extensive time with an injury next year we will all be very thankful for the Harris pick because neither Burkhead nor White can be counted on to carry the load on first and second downs for more than a handful of games.

Also, the Pats have the inside scoop on Michel’s knee. Perhaps it is worse than they realized and they feel that Michel’s reps need to be managed. Teams cannot have “too much” running back depth given the rate at which RBs get injured in the league and his versatility as a three down back who was one of the better past protecting backs in the draft may end up being important for them as soon as next year.

From listening to Caserio’s Day 2 recap, it seemed pretty clear that they picked him because the top rated player left on their board, likely by a significant margin, even if he did not represent one of the teams top “needs”.

It's not rocket surgery. Michel and Burkhead are big injury risks, as was White earlier in his career. Hill didn't even make it out of preseason last year.

Cordarelle Patterson started 2 games at RB last year.

I'm not ok with "2019 Brandon Bolden: Feature Back" - I don't know about anyone else.

Harris wasn't a luxury pick, he fills a glaring need.

captain stone · May 7, 2019

TommyD4207 said:
Harris wasn't a luxury pick, he fills a glaring need.

And Dawson Knox wouldn't?

SBLIII · May 7, 2019

captain stone said:
And Dawson Knox wouldn't?

Negative.

Everyone Seems VERY Happy With This Draft So Far

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

PatsFans.com Supporter

Starting QB, won 20 SBs, number is retired

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

A master debater and a cunning linguist

No asterisks

On the Game Day Roster

Hall of Fame Poster

In the Starting Line-Up

Eff you, Shula

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Independent Investigator & pliable af

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

In the Starting Line-Up

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

In the Starting Line-Up

Similar threads