If patriots lose out, Travis Hunter could be theirs

[festy1986]

This is what the Panther's gave up:

1.01 for 1.09, 2.61, 1.01 in '24, a 2nd in '25; and DJ Moore .... I'll just say we aren't getting anything in that realm.

Why not?

I'm not saying we are but to dismiss it outright is foolish.

This happens in the NFL periodically and it will happen again.

 

[EMpats]

As unusual as a two way player is, I think it would be absolutely crazy to put Travis Hunter in a box and limit him to one side of the ball.

Did anyone ever think there would be a Shohei Ohtani? That's Travis Hunter.

I envision a scenario for him on the Pats like this:
In the regular season: 55 offensive snaps per game, 20 defensive snaps in third down passing situations for a total of 75 snaps per game. That is a doable total that many starters who are core special teamers play.

In the playoffs, you unleash him: Full time offense and defense.

 

[oceansizer]

As unusual as a two way player is, I think it would be absolutely crazy to put Travis Hunter in a box and limit him to one side of the ball.

Did anyone ever think there would be a Shohei Ohtani? That's Travis Hunter.

I envision a scenario for him on the Pats like this:
In the regular season: 55 offensive snaps per game, 20 defensive snaps in third down passing situations for a total of 75 snaps per game. That is a doable total that many starters who are core special teamers play.

In the playoffs, you unleash him: Full time offense and defense.

In the playoffs you say

 

[EMpats]

In the playoffs you say

One day, in theory...

 

[Huckleberry1]

Then you misread what I originally wrote. No one is trading our first round pick in exchange for a second round pick. I certainly never wrote that.

What I am saying is that when you trade a pick the swap of picks is not part of what you are really getting, as you are just getting a worse pick. So if you trade your #3 for their # 8 and a 2nd then all you are really getting is the 2nd.

At this point it’s all really moot, as after they play Buffalo twice, and the Chargers, their strength of schedule is likely going to move them down around 6, at which point you just take the OT.

 

[festy1986]

What I am saying is that when you trade a pick the swap of picks is not part of what you are really getting, as you are just getting a worse pick. So if you trade your #3 for their # 8 and a 2nd then all you are really getting is the 2nd.

At this point it’s all really moot, as after they play Buffalo twice, and the Chargers, their strength of schedule is likely going to move them down around 6, at which point you just take the OT.

Right but that's not what I said. I said "pick 3 to pick 7. And getting a first and a second for your troubles"

So you are traded a first round pick and a second pick just to swap from pick 3 to pick 7.

We're not simply swapping first round picks and getting a second round pick out of it. Not worth the trouble.

They're not trading the pick anyway, I was simply saying that it would take a first and a second just get the conversation going.

As for SOS. Tankathon already has buffalo and the chargers accounted for in the SOS you see on their site. It's not going to skyrocket after they play them.

 

[Headcase]

Why not?

I'm not saying we are but to dismiss it outright is foolish.

This happens in the NFL periodically and it will happen again.

Because the QBs at the top of this draft aren't the tier of player that that sort of compensation would demand.

WIll it happen again, sure....we probably could have gotten something like that last year if we wanted to trade out of #3.....but the QBs at the top this year are both worse prospects than any of the top 3 last year.

 

[festy1986]

Because the QBs at the top of this draft aren't the tier of player that that sort of compensation would demand.

WIll it happen again, sure....we probably could have gotten something like that last year if we wanted to trade out of #3.....but the QBs at the top this year are both worse prospects than any of the top 3 last year.

You don't need the world to move back 4 slots.

Hunter is a generational talent and someone will want him to make that trade back worth it if you made the decision to pass on him.

 

[Uptown]

 

[Uptown]

Hunter @ 3 & this dude in the 2nd or late first with a trade up.

 

[tuckeverlasting]

Bills and Chargers are already counted in the SOS. So doesn't matter that they play them. Since there are at least 2 division games in the last 3 for most teams the SOS is going to change less over the next 3 weeks.
Patriots basically have a 5-game lead over Jags with 3 weeks to go. 8 games over Carolina.
Also, Jags play Raiders and Titans, good Chance of winning 1 or both.
Most important thing is to have your division teams lose the non-division games as the division teams count as 2 since they play them both.
You want Jets to lose to Rams, and Dolphins to lose to 49ers. You'd want Texans to beat Chiefs to hurt Jags SOS.

Even if the Pats lose the last 3 games, they may end up with a worse draft position because they play their games against 3 winning teams, so their Strength of Schedule will increase allowing Jac and Car to draft before the Pats.

ok.....which is it ?

ok never mind...figured it out.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

ok.....which is it ?

Bills and Chargers are already in the SOS. It appears like some posters falsely assume the Bills and Chargers will be added to the SOS formula after we play them which is incorrect. The math guys doing the SOS already know our schedule so all games/teams are included.

Having said that, every team's winning percentage changes weekly so the SOS changes weekly as well. For instance Buffalo is 11-3 right now so they have a 11/14 = 0.786 winning percentage. If Buffalo wins their last three games, the winning percentage would be 14/17 = 0.824. So the Pats SOS would increase, not a good thing, but not by a lot because the 0.038 increase is averaged over the whole 17 games. I am too tired to do all the math right now, I am not a math whiz, but you can see the Bills and Chargers winning is not doom and gloom. If the Bills lose 1 out of their last three games their winning percentage drops, 13/17 = 0.765, and helps our SOS.

 

[KCSVEN]

Bills and Chargers are already in the SOS. It appears like some posters falsely assume the Bills and Chargers will be added to the SOS formula after we play them which is incorrect. The math guys doing the SOS already know our schedule so all games/teams are included.

Having said that, every team's winning percentage changes weekly so the SOS changes weekly as well. For instance Buffalo is 11-3 right now so they have a 11/14 = 0.786 winning percentage. If Buffalo wins their last three games, the winning percentage would be 14/17 = 0.824. So the Pats SOS would increase, not a good thing, but not by a lot because the 0.038 increase is averaged over the whole 17 games. I am too tired to do all the math right now, I am not a math whiz, but you can see the Bills and Chargers winning is not doom and gloom. If the Bills lose 1 out of their last three games their winning percentage drops, 13/17 = 0.765, and helps our SOS.

The bills play the Patriots twice, so obviously they have to win those games anyways it or SOS for Pats won’t help, Bills also they play the Jets who are in the division so it doesn’t matter who wins that game because both teams are in the division,
Also, you can eliminate all teams that both teams have played, any team the Patriots and Jacksonville or Patriots and Carolina have both played, those teams record is irrelevant
Same thing with Jacksonville and Carolina any games within the division between teams is a wash and since there are a lot of division games at the end of the year, that’s only a third of games that matter
I started putting together a list of teams that mattered for each team, but it’s like seven teams each and it’ll be easier to calculate what’s necessary after this week especially with the Raiders and Jacksonville playing each other

 

[tuckeverlasting]

Bills and Chargers are already in the SOS. It appears like some posters falsely assume the Bills and Chargers will be added to the SOS formula after we play them which is incorrect. The math guys doing the SOS already know our schedule so all games/teams are included.

Having said that, every team's winning percentage changes weekly so the SOS changes weekly as well. For instance Buffalo is 11-3 right now so they have a 11/14 = 0.786 winning percentage. If Buffalo wins their last three games, the winning percentage would be 14/17 = 0.824. So the Pats SOS would increase, not a good thing, but not by a lot because the 0.038 increase is averaged over the whole 17 games. I am too tired to do all the math right now, I am not a math whiz, but you can see the Bills and Chargers winning is not doom and gloom. If the Bills lose 1 out of their last three games their winning percentage drops, 13/17 = 0.765, and helps our SOS.

yeah, after the charger win i went to tankathon and i saw our sos went up so bills and chargers are already being calculated. so we are sitting pretty safe at 3 if we lose out. hunter is the gem of this class so if he's there we either trade for a haul or get a high end wr/cb assuming the giants and raiders take qb's which they should.

 

[Nunchucks]

yeah, after the charger win i went to tankathon and i saw our sos went up so bills and chargers are already being calculated. so we are sitting pretty safe at 3 if we lose out. hunter is the gem of this class so if he's there we either trade for a haul or get a high end wr/cb assuming the giants and raiders take qb's which they should.

It seems that Justin Jefferson could be the comparison

 

[VJCPatriot]

Maye to Hunter has a nice ring to it. Check out some highlights then we can dream of his TD catches for us up until draft day.

 

[Uptown]

 

[gobesmug]

You don't need the world to move back 4 slots.

Hunter is a generational talent and someone will want him to make that trade back worth it if you made the decision to pass on him.

So you acknowledge that Hunter is a generational talent, but your preference is to trade back for less quality players because you want to draft position over talent?

 

[mgteich]

So you acknowledge that Hunter is a generational talent, but your preference is to trade back for less quality players because you want to draft position over talent?

and Harrison was a generational talent in 2024. It seems that generation talents come around much more than once a generation (sort of like once in a generation hurricanes).
=========
No, we will not draft a tackle at 4 or 5.
====
As in 2024, we will have several choices when we pick.

 

[festy1986]

So you acknowledge that Hunter is a generational talent, but your preference is to trade back for less quality players because you want to draft position over talent?

I acknowledge that's what the hive is saying.

I already said he's not a two way player in the NFL. No one is.