#1 Need - Wide Receiver

[patsderoer]

Eh you can grab any decent blocking TE for cheap in FA or later rounds. We really don't need a third pass catching TE.. otherwise we would have kept Crumpler.

Crumpler dropped a sure TD vs the Jets last year. And Gronk's injury proved that the Pats do need a third pass catching TE.

 

[Beverly Boys]

Hello,
Yes a real wide out is needed. I don't know what happened to Ocho, if he had troubles with the plays, or just did not get get or make the most of his chances. We need a deep ball receiver that is tall! It was amazing that most throws were relatively short, it was yards after catch that netted all the big yards. The Pats need to send it down field way more often. Just look at Brees or Rivers, first play of game and they throw a bomb.
Yes an improvement in D is also critical. I really thought the D improved greatly in the last part of the season, but still need to get way better. B.B is supposed to be a D-fense specialist, but the D must get way better. The pass rush also did improve late in the season. The run D has been fairly good.

 

[mgteich]

I understand that it is difficult to deal with more than one need at a time, or to consider an entire offseason strategy rather than just focusing on our #1 need.

As of now, the #1 need is clearly wide receiver. That's pretty clear. We have signed exactly zero wide receivers that we want as our top four receivers for the 2012 team. By the time the draft comes, wide receiver will still be a need, but perhaps a minor one. Hopefully, we will have three veteran receivers under contract, perhaps Welker, Branch and Lloyd. We'd be looking for a developmental youngster as we do every year.

I also expect us to sign or re-sign a center or 1 and a DL/OLB or 2.

We have four picks in the first 2 rounds and 1 in the third. We should be able to address at 3-4 top draft needs by th end of the third round, even given the trades forward and back.

As of now our top needs are WR, C, DL, OLB, DB, DB and TE. I expect us to address much of this through re-signings and through free agency before the draft.

Obviously, it is very difficult to project what our needs will be in late April. Much will change between now and then.

I thought a very high need was a 3rd TE? http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...10/897714-tight-end-very-high-draft-need.html

 

[manxman2601]

Considering the short window before the rookie player becomes FA, the entire round 2 on 2011 gave us a BIG FAT 0, between Ras I and Vereen.

No Brainer that Brooks Reed and Torrey Smith would have helped us win the SB this year.

Rd 3 picks - Mallet a clipboard holder for 3 or more years still, and Ridley was barely used.

So, out of a whopping 5 picks used in first 3 rounds, the contribution Pats got in 2011 season by all the dealing by Mr BB was Nate Solder for 13 games.

EPIC FAIL

This sort of logic defies belief. Drafts are only for the first year? Sheesh.

Thank God you weren't GM when Tom Brady was on the board. I can just imagine it: "Nah! He's just going to be a clipboard holder for a year. Let's pass and find someone who will get some game time"

Your draft logic will only net us one thing. Year after year of very high draft picks.

 

[patsinthesnow]

Remember during the 2007 offseason, the pats traded a 2nd for Welker, traded a fourth for Moss, signed Stallworth, and signed Kelly Washington.

Four WRs that ended up on the roster during the 07 season, quite the turn around.

I doubt we'll see a turnover that big, as we'll resign Slater, but if Ocho/Branch are canned, and Welker goes elsewhere, the turnover will be big.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Yea, there we go. Maybe that explains why

Rd2 2006 Trading up for Chad Jackson(one year wonder at UF with 88 of 106 catches) over Greg Jennings(238 receptions at Western Mich)

Rd3 2009 picking ACL+MCL torn Brandon Tate from UNC over Mike Wallace(next pick after Tate)

Rd2 2010 Another gem in Taylor Price

These type of comments and rationales regarding draft picks are completely pointless, yet for whatever reason (I guess because people like to complain) they seem to be the most prevalent when it comes to draft discussion.

Anybody can very easily play the 'Team X should have drafted this guy instead of that guy, therefore they're dumb and horrible at drafting' game with each and every NFL team. It proves absolutely nothing.

News flash: nobody hits on every pick! Not only that, they all miss on more than one pick! Teams will have some draft picks that don't pan out this year! Whoa, stop the presses, alert the media; this is earth-shattering news!

The 'should'a drafted this guy' hindsight commentary is just an exercise in futility - especially when you only look at one team, and only look for misses. In a vacuum with no comparison of how all 31 other teams have done over an extended period of time - both good and bad - it's about as useful as tits on a bull.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Eh you can grab any decent blocking TE for cheap in FA or later rounds. We really don't need a third pass catching TE.. otherwise we would have kept Crumpler.

Crumpler was cut because he was INJURED, otherwise he would have been very valuable.

 

[MaineMan]

For years we've been trying to replace Gaffney, BB should have just kept him in the first place. Penny wise and pound foolish.

At the time that Gaffney was pirated away (along with Lonie Paxton) by McDaniels in Denver, the Pats were still on the hook for Matt Cassell's Franchise Tag cap hit (about $15M) and actually over the projected cap. Thus, they couldn't make any substantial firm offers to their own FAs. Forty-eight hours after Gaffney signed with the Broncos, after the deal shedding Cassell onto Pioli was official, things might have been significantly different. In any case, it's merely speculation to say that BB wouldn't have paid to keep him.

 

[Snake Eyes]

At the time that Gaffney was pirated away (along with Lonie Paxton) by McDaniels in Denver, the Pats were still on the hook for Matt Cassell's Franchise Tag cap hit (about $15M) and actually over the projected cap. Thus, they couldn't make any substantial firm offers to their own FAs. Forty-eight hours after Gaffney signed with the Broncos, after the deal shedding Cassell onto Pioli was official, things might have been significantly different. In any case, it's merely speculation to say that BB wouldn't have paid to keep him.

Pirated away? There was nothing preventing Gaffney from waiting until the Cassel deal was over and looking over options from both teams. Also, I think it's a mistake to not resign players before their deal is at term. Granted, I don't know the specifics of what goes on in the FO, none of us do, but I'd do everything I could to resign the players you know you want to keep before they hit free agency.

 

[Deus Irae]

These type of comments and rationales regarding draft picks are completely pointless, yet for whatever reason (I guess because people like to complain) they seem to be the most prevalent when it comes to draft discussion.

Anybody can very easily play the 'Team X should have drafted this guy instead of that guy, therefore they're dumb and horrible at drafting' game with each and every NFL team. It proves absolutely nothing.

News flash: nobody hits on every pick! Not only that, they all miss on more than one pick! Teams will have some draft picks that don't pan out this year! Whoa, stop the presses, alert the media; this is earth-shattering news!

The 'should'a drafted this guy' hindsight commentary is just an exercise in futility - especially when you only look at one team, and only look for misses. In a vacuum with no comparison of how all 31 other teams have done over an extended period of time - both good and bad - it's about as useful as tits on a bull.

While your overall point has some validity, it ignores the times when the "should have" makes perfect sense. Trading up for Jackson when Jennings was available, choosing Tate over Wallace, drafting O'Connell.... decisions like those are fair game. I've defended the Tate gamble in the past, and I'll never hold it against the Patriots, but let's not pretend that the O'Connell pick was anything but stupid, just to point to one obvious example (and, yes, I was against it at the time).

 

[MaineMan]

As of now, our #1 need is clearly wide receiver. Ochocinco is NOT staying unless he agrees to a new contract (if at all); so he is essentially a free agent. Welker, Branch and Slater are unsigned.

Edelman and Underwood are currently our 2012 wide receivers.

We could franchise Welker (and we will if he doesn't sign); bu that won't help the first half of the season.

BOTTOM LINE
I don't want wide receiver to be a HUGE draft need. I would hope that we have at least THREE receivers signed before the draft. Welker, Branch and Lloyd certainly come to mind.
Wide receiver would still be a top draft targer, just not a critical need.

In some sense, we are in a similar place with the center position, although less serious. As long as we re-sign Koppen or Connolly, we have no critical draft need.

I'm not really disputing your premise, I just think that the picture might be clearer if the info was organized a bit differently. I prefer to think in terms of a player's actual role, like "pass-catcher", regardless of official positional designations.

Signed:
Gronk (TE) - 124 tgts, 73% catch rate, #6 in NFL overall in yds (#1 TE), #4 in YAC (just behind Sproles and Rice), #1 overall in TDs (17)
Hernandez (TE) - 113 tgts, 70% catch rate, #31 in yds (#3 TE), #9 in YAC, 7 TDs
Ochocinco (soon to be "Johnson" again) - 32 tgts, 47% catch rate, 18.4 Yds/Catch (highest on the team, by far, and 8th overall among guys with 30+ targets); better than Gaffney's 1st season and better than about 70% of the #5 pass-catchers the Pats have had over the BB years.

Edelman (barely a WR; really more appropriately designated "special teamer/returner/utility player")

Underwood (early entrant in the camp-body sweepstakes)
Dorin ****erson (early entrant in the camp-body sweepstakes)
Brett Swain (early entrant in the camp-body sweepstakes)

Unsigned:
Welker - 173 tgts, 71% catch rate, #2 in NFL (to Megatron) in yds, #1 in YAC, 9 TDs (same as Cruz and V-Jax; better than Fitzgerald, White, Marshall, Nicks, Wallace, Colston, etc.)
Branch - 90 tgts, 57% catch rate, 702 yds, 5 TDs (an average season for him, maybe even slightly above, though not quite as productive overall as 2010)

Slater - Really? A "wide receiver"? A token positional designation for a special teams specialist if there ever was one. He's not really on the WR depth chart for me - even less so than Edelman is on the Safety depth chart.

The point being that, if Welker and Branch are re-signed, that would account for about 500 of Brady's 611 targets in 2011, regardless what happens with Ocho or the rest of the roster-end guys, special-teamers and PS/Camp bodies.

Sure, if you're looking exclusively at the guys on the roster who are officially designated "WR", and especially if you're viewing them from the roster-bottom up (and including Slater, Edelman, etc.), the natural reaction is going to be "OMFG!!! The Pats need to DOOOO something about this RTFS!!!" But I'm not certain the situation is that dire. I mean, how many targets is any "new guy" going to see? 50 would replace Ocho and cut into Branch and a hundred would replace Branch and then some. But the passing game would still be centered around just four guys, unless we think that Brady's going to throw 650+ passes in 2012. Not sure I'm comfortable with either of those things.

Personally, I'd very much like to see a developmental TE/FB/H-back (besides ****erson) who might have some potential to fill-in (somewhat) for Gronk the next time he gets hurt. I'd also like to see at least one solid, young route-runner with great hands to apprentice to Branch and replace his 50-catch, 700-yd, 5 TD output by 2013. Anything much beyond that for 2012 would be gravy and I'd hope would accompany Brady throwing a bit less and spreading the ball around a bit more equitably when he does throw.

 

[BaltimorePatsFan]

Do you guys really want BB to take another a wide receiver after PK Sam, Bethel Johnson, Chad Jackson, Brandon Tate, and Taylor Price? The man can't draft receivers at all.

 

[Ron Sellers]

While your overall point has some validity, it ignores the times when the "should have" makes perfect sense. Trading up for Jackson when Jennings was available, choosing Tate over Wallace, drafting O'Connell.... decisions like those are fair game. I've defended the Tate gamble in the past, and I'll never hold it against the Patriots, but let's not pretend that the O'Connell pick was anything but stupid, just to point to one obvious example (and, yes, I was against it at the time).

Good point; I'm in 100% agreement with you regarding that O'Connell pick; it made no sense to me on any level at the time it was made; even less with the benefit of knowing how it (didn't) work out.

The hindsight cherry-picking of 'look, the team could'a should'a drafted this other guy instead' is to me a useless exercise that really needs to go away in my opinion, and as you noted that's the overall point I was trying to make.

Tate vs Wallace is definitely fair game too; there were plenty of valid reasons for going with Wallace rather than Tate prior to knowing how their careers up to this point would turn out. Jackson versus Jennings I'm not quite as sold on because at one time I went back and couldn't find anybody rating Jennings over Jackson; to me that one is more 20:20 hindsight as well, in my opinion.

 

[mgteich]

We're on the same page.

If Welker and Branch have executed contracts before free agency (or even before the draft), we would have Welker, Branch, Gronkowski, Hernandez and Woodhead as returnees in the passing game. Ochocinco would be the #6 receiving target. Edelman would return as an emergency backup. One presumes that we will also re-sign Slater, giving us another emergency backup.

So, IF we re-sign Welker and Branch, we would be fine. Most here would prefer a free agent upgrade over Ochocinco, and perhaps a veteran backup TE.

If this is all completed before the draft, there is little draft need.
WR: Welker, Branch, free agent
TE: Gronkowksi, Hernandez, free agent
ST: Edelman, Slater
RB: Woodhead

We might add a draftee free agent to compete with Underwood in camp, and perhaps an UDFA.

I would note that most would more comfortable with four real wide receiver targets, especially with Josh coming back. At least, there may be a need for the future.

My BOTTOM LINE is that if we take of business before the draft, we will be drafting a WR for the future, if at all. After all, Underwood is that prospect.

I'm not really disputing your premise, I just think that the picture might be clearer if the info was organized a bit differently. I prefer to think in terms of a player's actual role, like "pass-catcher", regardless of official positional designations.

Signed:
Gronk (TE) - 124 tgts, 73% catch rate, #6 in NFL overall in yds (#1 TE), #4 in YAC (just behind Sproles and Rice), #1 overall in TDs (17)
Hernandez (TE) - 113 tgts, 70% catch rate, #31 in yds (#3 TE), #9 in YAC, 7 TDs
Ochocinco (soon to be "Johnson" again) - 32 tgts, 47% catch rate, 18.4 Yds/Catch (highest on the team, by far, and 8th overall among guys with 30+ targets); better than Gaffney's 1st season and better than about 70% of the #5 pass-catchers the Pats have had over the BB years.

Edelman (barely a WR; really more appropriately designated "special teamer/returner/utility player")

Underwood (early entrant in the camp-body sweepstakes)
Dorin ****erson (early entrant in the camp-body sweepstakes)
Brett Swain (early entrant in the camp-body sweepstakes)

Unsigned:
Welker - 173 tgts, 71% catch rate, #2 in NFL (to Megatron) in yds, #1 in YAC, 9 TDs (same as Cruz and V-Jax; better than Fitzgerald, White, Marshall, Nicks, Wallace, Colston, etc.)
Branch - 90 tgts, 57% catch rate, 702 yds, 5 TDs (an average season for him, maybe even slightly above, though not quite as productive overall as 2010)

Slater - Really? A "wide receiver"? A token positional designation for a special teams specialist if there ever was one. He's not really on the WR depth chart for me - even less so than Edelman is on the Safety depth chart.

The point being that, if Welker and Branch are re-signed, that would account for about 500 of Brady's 611 targets in 2011, regardless what happens with Ocho or the rest of the roster-end guys, special-teamers and PS/Camp bodies.

Sure, if you're looking exclusively at the guys on the roster who are officially designated "WR", and especially if you're viewing them from the roster-bottom up (and including Slater, Edelman, etc.), the natural reaction is going to be "OMFG!!! The Pats need to DOOOO something about this RTFS!!!" But I'm not certain the situation is that dire. I mean, how many targets is any "new guy" going to see? 50 would replace Ocho and cut into Branch and a hundred would replace Branch and then some. But the passing game would still be centered around just four guys, unless we think that Brady's going to throw 650+ passes in 2012. Not sure I'm comfortable with either of those things.

Personally, I'd very much like to see a developmental TE/FB/H-back (besides ****erson) who might have some potential to fill-in (somewhat) for Gronk the next time he gets hurt. I'd also like to see at least one solid, young route-runner with great hands to apprentice to Branch and replace his 50-catch, 700-yd, 5 TD output by 2013. Anything much beyond that for 2012 would be gravy and I'd hope would accompany Brady throwing a bit less and spreading the ball around a bit more equitably when he does throw.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Do you guys really want BB to take another a wide receiver after PK Sam, Bethel Johnson, Chad Jackson, Brandon Tate, and Taylor Price? The man can't draft receivers at all.

Consider this: in his first ten years with the Patriots Belichick drafted Dave Stachelski, Arthur Love, Jabari Hollaway, Daniel Graham, Ben Watson, Andy Stokes and David Thomas as tight ends, as well as Garrett Mills who was a FB/H-back/TE.

Of all those players the only ones that amounted to anything were Watson and Graham, and neither of them really lived up to first-round pick expectations.

So based on your logic Belichick should have therefore stopped drafting tight ends at that point, and not drafted any tight ends in 2010.

Do you really think that would have been a good idea?

 

[Off The Grid]

...The point being that, if Welker and Branch are re-signed, that would account for about 500 of Brady's 611 targets in 2011, regardless what happens with Ocho or the rest of the roster-end guys, special-teamers and PS/Camp bodies.

Sure, if you're looking exclusively at the guys on the roster who are officially designated "WR", and especially if you're viewing them from the roster-bottom up (and including Slater, Edelman, etc.), the natural reaction is going to be "OMFG!!! The Pats need to DOOOO something about this RTFS!!!"

But I'm not certain the situation is that dire.

:rocker: Brother Maine FTW!!! :rocker:

 

[NinjaZX6R]

3rd round gems.......Brandon Tate, Taylor Price are no worse than Bethel or Chad.

Considering we traded up for Chad and passed on very productive college WR Greg Jennings(238 catches), and then followed it up by taking Tate(8 career TD at NC) over Wallace(15 TD's in 3 yrs at Miss), it just shows a blind monkey can scout WR position better than BB.

A for Bethel and Taylor, holy effin sheezzzzz

2003.....passed up Anquan Boldin for Bethel. Again, Anquan was a productive college WR. 2 yrs at FSU, 106 catches, 1600+ yards, 16TD
Bethel was well Texas Cow manure.


Masterpiece resume of WR scouting and drafting BB ! Masterpiece

You should offer your services to Bill.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

The Pats haven't drafted a wr iin the first round under Belichick. Hard to say any failed. When we haven't selected one. In the 2nd round he has drafted 3. Deion Branch, Chad Jackson and Bethel Johnson. One home run. And, two washouts. Not awful for the 2nd round. You usually hit on 50pct. He hit on 33. Our 3RD rounders have been terrible in general. Don't have to single out wr.

Bill never took a CB ever in the 1st round (Browns or Pats) till he took Devin. Things could change. Would be nice if they did.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

Considering the short window before the rookie player becomes FA, the entire round 2 on 2011 gave us a BIG FAT 0, between Ras I and Vereen.

No Brainer that Brooks Reed and Torrey Smith would have helped us win the SB this year.

Rd 3 picks - Mallet a clipboard holder for 3 or more years still, and Ridley was barely used.

So, out of a whopping 5 picks used in first 3 rounds, the contribution Pats got in 2011 season by all the dealing by Mr BB was Nate Solder for 13 games.

EPIC FAIL

No. Brooks Reed?? LOL. He is a pure speed rusher who can't set the edge, can't cover for crap and doesn't have any other move other than a speed rush.
Torrey Smith-You mean an one dimensional player who can't go inside and drops balls.

I'm glad Bill is drafting for the Pats instead of you.

 

[reflexblue]

As of now, our #1 need is clearly wide receiver. Ochocinco is NOT staying unless he agrees to a new contract (if at all); so he is essentially a free agent. Welker, Branch and Slater are unsigned.

Edelman and Underwood are currently our 2012 wide receivers.

We could franchise Welker (and we will if he doesn't sign); bu that won't help the first half of the season.

BOTTOM LINE
I don't want wide receiver to be a HUGE draft need. I would hope that we have at least THREE receivers signed before the draft. Welker, Branch and Lloyd certainly come to mind.
Wide receiver would still be a top draft targer, just not a critical need.

In some sense, we are in a similar place with the center position, although less serious. As long as we re-sign Koppen or Connolly, we have no critical draft need.

I would say WR is the Second biggest need on the team, the first being the D-line/OLB. While the Offense has a half dozen play makers the defense has none other than VW and maybe Mayo. A top notch WR that would complete that offense, but this Offense Still, (without any up grade) can compete with anybody when healthy.