Damien Harris

[PScottman]

It’s unrealistic to expect a few carries down the stretch for a third round pick?

Two things:

Blitz pickup
Option routes

That's the two things Patriot running backs MUST not just do, but do well. Until then you're either just a runner (which Michel has pretty wrapped up as that role player) or you're in DNP-CD land.

 

[Deus Irae]

Glaring need yes. But i think bb tends to draft /manage personnel against the flow. When 3-4 was unpopular, he picked up those FAs and drafted for it. Switched when everyone was competing for same pool of limited 3-4 fit players. Iirc last draft Te was popular, which means he would have to overpay. He saw higher value with under picked rbs. So he tried to fill Te with FAs / throwing jags at the wall and tall WRs.
Agree that outcome was bad, but I at least (call it) "sympathize" with what he was trying to do.

Belichick drafts for need. He always has, and he doesn't deny doing it. He just doesn't draft purely for need. He folds need into his non-formula value "formula".

 

[farn]

Another disingenuous argument, if not a straw man one.

I mean, if you want to play sassy, we can.

Yes. You are so right. All teams could and should have elite all pros at every position and we should be devastated when one position isn’t as strong as others. Especially when the team in question is 10-1 despite injuries.

 

[Patstastic]

No. I was thinking BB was going to put $ elsewhere and change the offense. It hasn’t been pretty, I’ll grant you that, but I don’t think you need an elite TE to win the SB.

2018: Gronk
2017: Ertz
2016: Gronk for most of the year. Then Bennett. Again not Gronk good. But damm good.
2015: Daniels
2014: Gronk
2013: Wouldn't of mattered. That was an historically great D.
2012: Pitta
2011: Ballard
2010: Quarless
2009: Shockey

Besides the bolded, each of these TE's ranged from generational (Gronk), to great at the time (Ertz, Pitta and Shockey), to very good (Daniels). Maybe Ertz was even elite. I guess my point is that if you don't have a functional Tight End, the rest of your team better make up for it (2010 Packers had arguably the best offense and defense). The outlier seems to be the 2011 Giants. Luckily, this Pats D is the best in the league. Whether it's enough to overcome the offense's shortcomings is TBD. One thing is for certain: this would be by far the worst TE group to win a SB in quite some time. Pending we win.

 

[Deus Irae]

... All teams could and should have elite all pros at every position and we should be devastated when one position isn’t as strong as others....

Obvious strawman is obvious strawman

 

[farn]

2018: Gronk
2017: Ertz
2016: Gronk for most of the year. Then Bennett. Again not Gronk good. But damm good.
2015: Daniels
2014: Gronk
2013: Wouldn't of mattered. That was an historically great D.
2012: Pitta
2011: Ballard
2010: Quarless
2009: Shockey

Besides the bolded, each of these TE's ranged from generational (Gronk), to great at the time (Ertz, Pitta and Shockey), to very good (Daniels). Maybe Ertz was even elite. I guess my point is that if you don't have a functional Tight End, the rest of your team better make up for it (2010 Packers had arguably the best offense and defense). The outlier seems to be the 2011 Giants. Luckily, this Pats D is the best in the league. Whether it's enough to overcome the offense's shortcomings is TBD. One thing is for certain: this would be by far the worst TE group to win a SB in quite some time. Pending we win.

Think you might be making my point re 2013.

 

[farn]

Obvious strawman is obvious strawman

My argument is the following :

TE is overvalued and a team can win despite not having elite (or even “very good”) talent at the position. My reasoning is that efforts to get elite talent at other positions can compensate for a lack at TE. My proof is that the team is currently 10-1.

 

[Oswlek]

So during the off-season you didn’t think TE was a need?

They tried to sign a few, but the situation was murky due to Gronk not retiring yet.

 

[Oswlek]

My argument is the following :

TE is overvalued and a team can win despite not having elite (or even “very good”) talent at the position. My reasoning is that efforts to get elite talent at other positions can compensate for a lack at TE. My proof is that the team is currently 10-1.

I bet NE wishes things had gone differently with the TE position. In fact, I expect them to double dip in next year's draft.

That said, WR was just as much of a need, the guys who aren't playing flashed in the PS, Gronk co(kblocked a few FAs and NE clearly wasn't thrilled by the TE class. So the situation was more fluid than some suggest.

 

[Deus Irae]

My argument is the following :

TE is overvalued and a team can win despite not having elite (or even “very good”) talent at the position.

Your argument is meaningless. Any positional deficit can be overcome in the short term. We've seen teams win Super Bowls with QBs who are clearly not SB level QBs. The same is true of players at every position. That doesn't make a position overrated. Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl, for crying out loud. Furthermore, who's demanding an elite TE here, other than you?

My reasoning is that efforts to get elite talent at other positions can compensate for a lack at TE.

Your reasoning is not really reasoning at any real level. If you are good enough at enough positions, you can compensate for a lack at any position. That's true of pretty much any major team sport. That's part of the point of "team", after all. That doesn't make any position unneeded, or overvalued.

My proof is that the team is currently 10-1.

Your "proof" is not a proof. The team's record is evidence that the team's record is what it is, and nothing more, particularly without context. It is not proof that the TE position is overvalued.

 

[203Pat]

Two things:

Blitz pickup
Option routes

That's the two things Patriot running backs MUST not just do, but do well. Until then you're either just a runner (which Michel has pretty wrapped up as that role player) or you're in DNP-CD land.

By all accounts he was a good blocker in the passing game in college and training camp. As for the option routes Sony hasn’t figured that out either.

 

[MainePatsFan26]

These 4 day weekends can really mess a brother up

Fugue state. Fugue. State.

 

[luuked]

Unrealistic?

A top-90 draft pick?

At RB, the Easiest position to successfully transition from college to pro?

While our running game sucks big moose?

Seriously?


Meanwhile...Dawson...Knox...Foster...Moreau...

The only thing disingenuous in this thread is you behaving as if it is not par for the course that RBs get an almost red shirt year on a BB team. Especially with three established backs ahead.

We have been through this dozens of times. Nothing Harris could do would change anything about the running game issues (caused mostly by the OL).

Do you want to know why I know this ? Because he is practicing and running the same drills as the other RBs on the roster almost every day in practice. If he had flashed some uncanny ability to make people miss the coaches would know and made him active to help a struggling ground game.

Why do you even keep watching this team ? You clearly think the coaching staff is a bunch of idiots, the front office is a similar bunch of morons and more than half of the players are "fecking incompetent".

 

[luuked]

Sony Michel?

Go on with your list. Don't stop at a sample size of one with the outlier first round pick if you want to make a point.

 

[captain stone]

Bill the GM is killing Bill the HC.

 

[SBLIII]

Dawson Knox sure would look nice in this offense.

 

[PScottman]

TE is overvalued

I'm not sure that's entirely true because the "TE defender" as an archetype doesn't really exist. The 6'5" - 6'7" guys who can run and catch...they aren't going to defense. Additionally taking your best DBs off the WRs isn't always the soundest strategy either.

There are outliers - Chung has performed very well against many TEs. Talib was also well suited to the task, but both still gave up 5-6" minimum on those guys.

 

[PScottman]

By all accounts he was a good blocker in the passing game in college and training camp. As for the option routes Sony hasn’t figured that out either.

Exactly my point - they already have one roster spot devoted to the "lead back" runner. They're usually not going to devote two.

 

[PScottman]

Because he is practicing and running the same drills as the other RBs on the roster almost every day in practice. If he had flashed some uncanny ability to make people miss the coaches would know and made him active to help a struggling ground game.

For the doubters, what from the 20 year history of this head coach indicates that he is NOT willing to play rookies who surpass the starters when that talent is clearly above the incumbent?

How many UDFA start by year end for those past Patriot teams?

How many "WTF" starts have we seen because an individual player had great practices or the coaches thought he presented a better matchup versus that week's opponent? (That's a whole other point in itself - the people bemoaning NOT playing guys like Harris are the EXACT SAME ONES who likewise bemoan when other rookies do get a "surprise" start).

This coaching staff, bottom line, play the players they believe best give them a chance to win. They are NOT infallible - they make mistakes (Malcolm Butler says hello), but if people want to complain about a historical record that includes SIX Lombardis...they are the type that will always be miserable.

 

[203Pat]

Exactly my point - they already have one roster spot devoted to the "lead back" runner. They're usually not going to devote two.

Well when one isn’t very good find out what the other one has.