Many posters have mock drafts where the Pats make 7-9 picks. One thing to consider is who that late round rookie would be competing w/ for a spot on the 53.
For example say we take a WR in round 5. Sure that rookie could win the camp battle and prove to be the better player. But how big is the gap between the rookie WR and whoever was cut. Is there more value keeping the vet WR and getting a future pick?
This situation could be extended to many areas on the roster. Brace and Pryor are two guys who could get beat out by a late round pick. Same situation at the 4th rb spot. We could draft a guy or go w/ 1 of the FBs we signed.
Personally I like taking the future pick. By trading a 5th for a future 4 we are guaranteeing ourselves an increase in the value of our assets. Using the late round selection to increase camp competition is a gamble.
Of course there's nothing saying either philosophy needs to be strictly adhered to. I just find it unrealistic to think there will be 7-9 rookies on our 53. Thoughts?
For example say we take a WR in round 5. Sure that rookie could win the camp battle and prove to be the better player. But how big is the gap between the rookie WR and whoever was cut. Is there more value keeping the vet WR and getting a future pick?
This situation could be extended to many areas on the roster. Brace and Pryor are two guys who could get beat out by a late round pick. Same situation at the 4th rb spot. We could draft a guy or go w/ 1 of the FBs we signed.
Personally I like taking the future pick. By trading a 5th for a future 4 we are guaranteeing ourselves an increase in the value of our assets. Using the late round selection to increase camp competition is a gamble.
Of course there's nothing saying either philosophy needs to be strictly adhered to. I just find it unrealistic to think there will be 7-9 rookies on our 53. Thoughts?
