A tale of a draft SQUANDERED....

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I think we have to recognize a few things.
-We went into the draft with a uniquely young defense and a veteran offense. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to conclude filling the offensive needs in the draft and defensive in FA would make sense.

From the 14-2 team we had last year, we have the following subtractiins.

QB None
RB Lost Taylor, Morris and probably Faulk plus BJGE is an RFA who could be lost
WR None
TE None
T Lost Light
C/G Lost Neal but have a replacement who started most of last season

DE ADDED Warren
NT None
OLB None
ILB None
CB ADDED BODDEN
S None

I dont know why we are surpised that 3 of the first 4 picks went to those areas.

I don't think many are complaining primarily of the 'positions' that Belichick addressed early, but of 'whom' we selected.

Most dreamers in here want a boatload of big named players in the majority of our draft and every year it NEVER happens and they get frustrated and upset.

If we had picked Brian Ingram at 17 and LeShoure at the second pick and then Solder at the 3rd pick and the popular Ricky Stanzi as the 4th pick there would not be as many critics.

Many are upset at the lack of 'sexy' players...not exactly all are upset at the positions themselves.

 

[Patspsycho]

Did you know:

In the second half of last season:

The Patriots were tied for 2nd in the NFL in sacks (1 out of first)
Allowed only a 57.4% completion percentage, 9th best in the league
Led the league in Ints
Allowed the 3rd fewest points at less than 16 per game.
Held half of their opponents to 7 points or less. Think about that 7 points or less in half of the games.
And were 8-0
Beat 5 playoff teams in those 8 wins
While allowing a 46% 3rd down conversion rate.

These numbers suggest something different than what you are saying.
They developed into a good pass rushing team. (Good by comparison to the league, not some opinion)
Pass defense was good
Overall defense was very good
3rd down conversion stats werent so good, even with the 2nd most sacks but the defense still dominated.

Maybe using terms like laughable to describe a defense that opened the season with a slew of new starters and young players and developed into the one that accomplished what you see above when it gelled.
Is there room for improvement, sure. Is there a reason to describe the defense of this team as if we were the Panthers? Of course not, and it cheapens whatever point you are trying to make.

This is a perfect illustration of why the draft occurred the way it did. Now that the entire D has had a year under it's belt, look for there to be more complex schemes, and a lot less predictability and this will lead to that "elusive" pass-rushing (e.g., QB pressure) people have been "seeking."

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't think many are complaining primarily of the 'positions' that Belichick addressed early, but of 'whom' we selected.

Most dreamers in here want a boatload of big named players in the majority of our draft and every year it NEVER happens and they get frustrated and upset.

If we had picked Brian Ingram at 17 and LeShoure at the second pick and then Solder at the 3rd pick and the popular Ricky Stanzi as the 4th pick there would not be as many critics.

Many are upset at the lack of 'sexy' players...not exactly all are upset at the positions themselves.

From what I've read, that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Ring 6]

This is a perfect illustration of why the draft occurred the way it did. Now that the entire D has had a year under it's belt, look for there to be more complex schemes, and a lot less predictability and this will lead to that "elusive" pass-rushing (e.g., QB pressure) people have been "seeking."

Plus we have a defense loaded with youth and an offense heavy with veterans. Seems to make sense we fill the offensive holes in the draft and defensive in Free Agency.

 

[DaBruinz]

You can trash them all you want, but the fact is that 4 teams felt there were QBs in this draft good enough to use thier top 12 picks on.
How else do you rate the strength of the QBs in the draft other than where they are picked?
With your logic, I can argue anything by saying even though the guy was drafted high, he sucks because I don't see him succeeding, then sprinkle in names of failures that arent even similar players to totally invalidate my point.
How labor uncertainty could affect that must be a secret only you know, but its a nice twist on this fairy tale of a post

Who is trashing them? You must be late to the draft or something because what I stated was fact. Prior to the Senior Bowl and even after the Senior Bowl, the consensus was that we might see only 1 or 2 QBs taken in round 1 and then it would be late in round one. Newton was being talked about as a 2nd rounder.. Locker as a 3rd or 4th rounder. Yet, teams became wildly enamored with these guys. Newton especially. I feel bad for the Carolina fans because Newton has bust written all over him.

Now, as for my example. You completely missed the point. The point was that you can't tell how strong a QB class is until long after the draft. The 1999 draft was through to have produced 5 franchise QBs. It produced 2. With Couch, Smith and McNown being utter failures.

With my logic, you go back to the actual drafts and use facts to show how you the jump in your logic is flawed. You don't just "sprinkle in names of failures" as you put it.

As for the labor uncertainty affecting the drafting of QBs, umm, gee.. Right now, we're looking at no football. At the very least, we're looking at football under 2010 rules.. Ones where those drafted in the top 16 pretty much are signing a 5 or 6 year deal. If the owners get their way, the players of the 2011 draft will be under a new rookie wage scale so even if the player does well, it's a few years before he'll see that money.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't think many are complaining primarily of the 'positions' that Belichick addressed early, but of 'whom' we selected.

Most dreamers in here want a boatload of big named players in the majority of our draft and every year it NEVER happens and they get frustrated and upset.

If we had picked Brian Ingram at 17 and LeShoure at the second pick and then Solder at the 3rd pick and the popular Ricky Stanzi as the 4th pick there would not be as many critics.

Many are upset at the lack of 'sexy' players...not exactly all are upset at the positions themselves.

On what board?
All I have read is that we didnt draft an OLB, we didnt draft a DE.
We didnt need a T (somehow we were going to figure out how to play with just one I guess) DB was a wasted pick and choosing the best QB on your board at 74 is assinine.
The only real player I see being questioned is Ridley.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

On what board?
All I have read is that we didnt draft an OLB, we didnt draft a DE.
We didnt need a T (somehow we were going to figure out how to play with just one I guess) DB was a wasted pick and choosing the best QB on your board at 74 is assinine.
The only real player I see being questioned is Ridley.

The moaning about Mallett seems to me to not only be because of drug issues but by those who remembered the Kevin O'Connell experiment as the 3rd round pick that failed and they think we could get a HOF QB in the 6th round and an NFL starter from the 7th round because it happened here before....to get a QB in the late rounds to succeed is Rare despite it happening in NE.

We needed to use an early pick on the next QB to develop under Brady as I don't think Hoyer was the answer....Mallett seems more capable to me and he was value there.

The Zac Robinson 7th round pick failed as well so why not grab a good looking QB in the 3rd this year?,I didn't see a problem with that decision....some here did.

 

[Ring 6]

Who is trashing them?

You

You must be late to the draft or something because what I stated was fact.

Dude, there is nothing resembling fact in:


I honestly felt that only Mallett, Stanzi, and possibly Dalton and McElroy had legit shots. The others just looked bad.

Cam Newton looks like JaMarcus Russell or Vince Young 2.0. I don't see him succeeding. Same with Ponder, Kaepernick, Locker, or Gabbert. But that is just my opinion.

Prior to the Senior Bowl and even after the Senior Bowl, the consensus was that we might see only 1 or 2 QBs taken in round 1 and then it would be late in round one.

You are seriously kidding me if you are using predictions of who will be drafted where over the actual picks to determine the real rating of a player.
Let me get this straight. Since people you read articles written by thought there wouldn't be QBs taken high, that means they weren't good enough to be taken high even though they were taken high?



quote]Newton was being talked about as a 2nd rounder.. Locker as a 3rd or 4th rounder. [/quote]
Really????? People were talking about something so the actual drafting is the facade and the buzz of draftniks is the fact? You are so far off here I cant believe you are writing this with a straight face.

Yet, teams became wildly enamored with these guys. Newton especially. I feel bad for the Carolina fans because Newton has bust written all over him.

He was the top pick in the draft. Whether you think he is going to be a bust is irrelevant. The most wanted player was a QB. That is a FACT in determining the strength of the QB class. DaBruinz thinks the most wanted player sucks is a useless bit of trivia.

Now, as for my example. You completely missed the point. The point was that you can't tell how strong a QB class is until long after the draft. The 1999 draft was through to have produced 5 franchise QBs. It produced 2. With Couch, Smith and McNown being utter failures.

Hindsight is 20/20.

With my logic, you go back to the actual drafts and use facts to show how you the jump in your logic is flawed. You don't just "sprinkle in names of failures" as you put it.

You cannot go back to this actual draft and say they failed.
Show me all the draft that we strong QB classes where no one drafted any QBs.

As for the labor uncertainty affecting the drafting of QBs, umm, gee.. Right now, we're looking at no football. At the very least, we're looking at football under 2010 rules.. Ones where those drafted in the top 16 pretty much are signing a 5 or 6 year deal. If the owners get their way, the players of the 2011 draft will be under a new rookie wage scale so even if the player does well, it's a few years before he'll see that money.

What in the world does that have to do with whether you draft a QB or not?
I think you need some sleep.

 

[Ring 6]

The moaning about Mallett seems to me to not only be because of drug issues but by those who remembered the Kevin O'Connell experiment as the 3rd round pick that failed and they think we could get a HOF QB in the 6th round and an NFL starter from the 7th round because it happened here before....to get a QB in the late rounds to succeed is Rare despite it happening in NE.

We needed to use an early pick on the next QB to develop under Brady as I don't think Hoyer was the answer....Mallett seems more capable to me and he was value there.

The Zac Robinson 7th round pick failed as well so why not grab a good looking QB in the 3rd this year?,I didn't see a problem with that decision....some here did.

I've seen numerous complaints that we wasted the pick on a QB when we could have drafted a LB or G or WR.
I see your perception that people don't like the guy, but the majority of complaints I've seen are that we didnt need to waste a 3rd round pick on a QB.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I've seen numerous complaints that we wasted the pick on a QB when we could have drafted a LB or G or WR.
I see your perception that people don't like the guy, but the majority of complaints I've seen are that we didnt need to waste a 3rd round pick on a QB.

Do you remember any major moaning when we selected O'Connell in the 3rd a few years ago?

I didn't remember that many complaints,just a few disappointed fans

And IMO Mallett is a much better looking QB and NFL caliber ready QB than O'Connell ever looked to be.

I think those that disliked the Mallett pick are those who think Hoyer would take over when Brady retires.....I never saw Hoyer as anything but backup material,I see Mallett as a starter someday as he appears more capable.

 

[Ring 6]

Do you remember any major moaning when we selected O'Connell in the 3rd a few years ago?

I didn't remember that many complaints,just a few disappointed fans

And IMO Mallett is a much better looking QB and NFL caliber ready QB than O'Connell ever looked to be.

I think those that disliked the Mallett pick are those who think Hoyer would take over when Brady retires.....I never saw Hoyer as anything but backup material,I see Mallett as a starter someday as he appears more capable.

I'm not arguing the validity of the complaining. I am saying the people complaining on this board are complianing that they dont like any QB at 74 more than QB is OK, but they wanted someone else.
I like the pick

 

[ClevTrev]

Well, PFK paints a different picture than I'm viewing at the moment. Given the distinct possibility of having two key players on the OL gone from the team before this season starts and another already retired, I like the Solder and Cannon picks, especially getting Cannon in the 5th round. The guy's a beast from a great program. The best athlete philosophy was clearly in play, and the Pat's draft was well orchestrated.

For those feeling the Pats missed out, it's clearly the Katzenmoyer syndrome that so many think the team's shortcomings must be addressed by a stud OLB. For those who forget or weren't around at the time, Katzenmoyer was widely hailed as a team savior by the media experts. Who said OLB was the primary need? Oh, right, the media experts.

So for those wringing hands over all this, that's a bummer man! It's uh...it's a bummer. :bricks:

 

[Ring 6]

Well, PFK paints a different picture than I'm viewing at the moment. Given the distinct possibility of having two key players on the OL gone from the team before this season starts and another already retired, I like the Solder and Cannon picks, especially getting Cannon in the 5th round. The guy's a beast from a great program. The best athlete philosophy was clearly in play, and the Pat's draft was well orchestrated.

For those feeling the Pats missed out, it's clearly the Katzenmoyer syndrome that so many think the team's shortcomings must be addressed by a stud OLB. For those who forget or weren't around at the time, Katzenmoyer was widely hailed as a team savior by the media experts. Who said OLB was the primary need? Oh, right, the media experts.

So for those wringing hands over all this, that's a bummer man! It's uh...it's a bummer. :bricks:

OLB is certainly a need. I just don't know how people expected us to solve it in this draft, for this year.
I fully expect the OLB position, or at least the pass rushing DE in the nickel/dime half of it to be addressed in FA. Once that is done there wont be much left to complain about in this draft.

 

[ClevTrev]

OLB is certainly a need. I just don't know how people expected us to solve it in this draft, for this year.
I fully expect the OLB position, or at least the pass rushing DE in the nickel/dime half of it to be addressed in FA. Once that is done there wont be much left to complain about in this draft.

Agreed, and that's one of the ways to address it. Remember how long it takes this team to indoctrinate OLBs to the point where they're effective at the position? Some of the veteran FAs they've acquired in the past didn't master the position at all and were gone after a season. Expecting a rookie with little or no training camp to be the answer is beyond logic. Maybe in another year, but this one is going to compress the whole schedule every day there is no settlement. It might be one of the wisest moves the team has made in that they're adjusting for current reality. I like the draft group the Pats have acquired. Let's hope we can see them in action soon.

 

[jukes]

The way i see it, with this sapposedly being a "defensive heavy draft" its pretty easy for the top teams to sit back and take some of the offensive players while defenders are dropping like hotcakes

 

[AzPatsFan]

As long time members know here about me is that I am one of the most pessimistic SOBs you will ever see in a Pats fan, but as far as this draft is concerned I was proud to see that Belichick loves his most prized player so much that he has certainly put all the parts around him to protect him from defensive pass rushers pounding him to the ground with some new blood on the OL,and with an apparent new unpredictable offense started by a new and certainly young ground game that has me excited as I love time killing drives.

This draft focused less on defense and more on keeping our QB around and healthy for a long time,not to mention some good insurance in Mallett should Tom be injured for any period of time.

Defense will come in the FA period,Belichick probably knows there will be much more talent in the FA pool on defense than on offense and that's why I think he focused on Brady as his biggest concern and took appropriate measures with those picks and worry about defense later.

The best thing about getting an OLB in FA is that he can help in 2011, not 2013, like getting a rookie would.

 

[Deus Irae]

The best thing about getting an OLB in FA is that he can help in 2011, not 2013, like getting a rookie would.

So Cunningham didn't help last year, and won't help this year?

 

[AzPatsFan]

So Cunningham didn't help last year, and won't help this year?

Who was it that said he only saw glimmers of production from Cunningham? But I think FA Manny Lawson or Kamerion Wembly would offer more in 2011 than a rookie.

 

[Deus Irae]

Who was it that said he only saw glimmers of production from Cunningham?

What I said doesn't alter the question. Your answer is what matters, since I'm asking you. Therefore, let me ask again....

So Cunningham didn't help last year, and won't help this year?

But I think FA Manny Lawson or Kamerion Wembly would offer more in 2011 than a rookie.

Wembley isn't going to offer the Patriots anything in 2011, since he was franchised by the Raiders, and then reached a 3 year deal with the team.

In Lawson's 5 year career to date, his second best year in the NFL was his rookie season.

 

[Ring 6]

What I said doesn't alter the question. Your answer is what matters, since I'm asking you. Therefore, let me ask again....

That comment is just stupid.

Wembley isn't going to offer the Patriots anything in 2011, since he was franchised by the Raiders, and then reached a 3 year deal with the team.

In Lawson's 5 year career to date, his second best year in the NFL was his rookie season.

Based on what?
Every analysis I have seen is that Lawson has improved consistently throughout his career.
What are you basing this claim on? Anyone evaluating his play on the filed would laugh at your statement.