Off The Grid Presents: Worst Mock EVER!!

[Off The Grid]

So basically, every athletic late round pick has the potential to be a stud. Good to know.

Yeah, you bet: I just hit "Sort By "40" Time" and racked up the first 10 guys.

Haters are a bitter lot.

 

[patfanken]

I count just 32 guys with a formidable level of "Roster Security".

*I asterisked the 3 Big Free Agents, and lit Green in red, as I estimate that one will depart.

I consider the notion that there isn't a ton of room for Draft Picks to impact our 53 man Roster ~ more like 64-66 with the Practice Squad + Shadow Roster ~ to be pure Urban Legend.

I’m not trying to build a 45 man Roster: I’m trying to build a 60 man Roster.

66, really, including the Shadow Roster.

And I’m going to say 69, allowing for a little expansion with the new CBA.

Perhaps more, if the CBA changes that, as well it might.

Open Issues​

Logan Mankins ~ In my Vision of a Mock Draft, this ferocious and powerfull Grizzly finally comes to his senses: He signs his Franchise tender and, ultimately, a long term deal. His Agent is butchered and fed to the dogs...And there is much rejoicing.

Matt Light ~ Matt also signs up, probably for a 3 year deal which he will almost certainly not finish, so easy on the Signing Bonus.

CBA ~ I'm hoping ~ and assuming, for the sake of this Mock ~ that enough clarity issues from the courts in the next few weeks that both sides know how much leverage either sides has...and can then negotiate accordingly, having attenuated their expectations. For the sake of this Mock, I'm saying that they come sufficiently to their senses to get this thing ironed out in time for Camp, and perhaps even a month or two earlier.

On to the Draft...​

Such an epic opus deserves at some detailed commentary.

BTW- You were just posting it when I first attempted a comment. Reading it as it went up was like the old time Sunday serials. You read and was left wanting more to see how it came out. Though when I first thought to post you had accumulated only 12 picks for the Pats

Here are my general comments:

1. Loved your first pick, and like that you recognized that it will take a move up to get it. Personally I think it will take a bit more. I'm thinking it he might not get past Dallas, though I believe Dallas would be a willing trade partner. I think Dallas would like an OLman but would feel more comfortable doing it 17 than 9. I hope you are right

2 We are at philosophical odds over the need to add (12 at the time) 23 new players. We would be WAY too young. We are already very young on the defensive side. Also your massive influx of players seems to forget the rich and deep impact of the eventual FA market.

3. I was OK with your first 2 trade downs (assuming there is not much difference in grades between 28 and 40 and there isn't any particular player we want in that area. Also as I don't see the need for so many picks I would upgrade them around and defer them to next year. I would prefer to keep my picks in the 30's (so lose the Jax trade) I think the real value in the 2nd round is there.

4. A lot of the guys you have in red are a lot more valuable and viable than many of the picks you propose. First of all the Pats aren't "projecting" there potential, they know what it is . They have film on all those players vs NFL caliber talent. They have also already invested a lot of time and coaching into the development of those players. They are NOT going to just throw that away to replace it with a dozen new draft picks of marginal quality and great hopes and dreams.

5. That being said there were several picks you made that I would be very happy to see posted on the Patiots.com as the newest memebers of the NE Patriots....among them are:
Kendrick Ellis
Shaine Vereen
C. Marsh
Greg Romeus
D VanDyke
C Mims
\These would all be welcome members of my draft. THE REST....not so much?

QB- need not apply, at leas this year. I know we need to pick up at least one in the UDFA p ool or UFAs but I wouldn't waste a draft pick on one. The Pats are reportedly very happy with Hoyer;s progress. But not to worry there is a good chance that McElroy could still be a patriot, but without wasting a pick.

TE''s WB's WE's HB's what ever you want to call them need not apply. Clearly there is an obsession with TE's going on here, but right now we HAVE the right combination of skills at the TE position. We have an elite blocking TE who doesn't embarrass himself in a pass route. We have a move TE (Hernandez) who might eventually rival Dallas Clark, and we have a combo TE in Gronk who could be the best all round TE in the league in a few years. Unfortunately there is only one ball. Adding to that trio will only dilute the effectiveness of the others. If you absolutely HAVE to have a TE, invest in your next elite blocking TE to replace Alge in a couple of years. Otherwise.....nevermind

Thanks for the effort I'm sure we all enjoyed the read. You mind must be like a funhouse for you. :
\

 

[Off The Grid]

Such an epic opus deserves at some detailed commentary.

BTW- You were just posting it when I first attempted a comment. Reading it as it went up was like the old time Sunday serials. You read and was left wanting more to see how it came out. Though when I first thought to post you had accumulated only 12 picks for the Pats

Here are my general comments:

1. Loved your first pick, and like that you recognized that it will take a move up to get it. Personally I think it will take a bit more. I'm thinking it he might not get past Dallas, though I believe Dallas would be a willing trade partner. I think Dallas would like an OLman but would feel more comfortable doing it 17 than 9. I hope you are right

2 We are at philosophical odds over the need to add (12 at the time) 23 new players. We would be WAY too young. We are already very young on the defensive side. Also your massive influx of players seems to forget the rich and deep impact of the eventual FA market.

3. I was OK with your first 2 trade downs (assuming there is not much difference in grades between 28 and 40 and there isn't any particular player we want in that area. Also as I don't see the need for so many picks I would upgrade them around and defer them to next year. I would prefer to keep my picks in the 30's (so lose the Jax trade) I think the real value in the 2nd round is there.

4. A lot of the guys you have in red are a lot more valuable and viable than many of the picks you propose. First of all the Pats aren't "projecting" there potential, they know what it is . They have film on all those players vs NFL caliber talent. They have also already invested a lot of time and coaching into the development of those players. They are NOT going to just throw that away to replace it with a dozen new draft picks of marginal quality and great hopes and dreams.

5. That being said there were several picks you made that I would be very happy to see posted on the Patiots.com as the newest memebers of the NE Patriots....among them are:
Kendrick Ellis
Shaine Vereen
C. Marsh
Greg Romeus
D VanDyke
C Mims
\These would all be welcome members of my draft. THE REST....not so much?

QB- need not apply, at leas this year. I know we need to pick up at least one in the UDFA p ool or UFAs but I wouldn't waste a draft pick on one. The Pats are reportedly very happy with Hoyer;s progress. But not to worry there is a good chance that McElroy could still be a patriot, but without wasting a pick.

TE''s WB's WE's HB's what ever you want to call them need not apply. Clearly there is an obsession with TE's going on here, but right now we HAVE the right combination of skills at the TE position. We have an elite blocking TE who doesn't embarrass himself in a pass route. We have a move TE (Hernandez) who might eventually rival Dallas Clark, and we have a combo TE in Gronk who could be the best all round TE in the league in a few years. Unfortunately there is only one ball. Adding to that trio will only dilute the effectiveness of the others. If you absolutely HAVE to have a TE, invest in your next elite blocking TE to replace Alge in a couple of years. Otherwise.....nevermind

Thanks for the effort I'm sure we all enjoyed the read.

Your mind must be like a funhouse for you.

It really is, Brother Ken!!

And thank you for your civil refutation of my notions.

I never ask for agreement ~ only civility.

***

For the record, I left 69 as a Top Line potential Greater Roster ~ inclusive of the P Squad, the IR, and the PUP List ~ but I purposefully left it vague, because it could break any number of ways. Those who think that a significant expansion of the rosters is out of the question, simply because the Owners didn't come right out and offer it, are simply kidding themselves about the negotiating process.

And with a potential Perfect Storm where the Owners are committed to a reduction of the Salary Cap at all costs, yet the Players are the ones with the Leverage ~ which is precisely where we currently are ~ then it's entirely possible that the Owners will end up making enormous concessions to get that Salary Cap reduction.

And the most obvious place for such concessions, which would in fact appeal to the vast majority of players, as most of them are either on or will soon be on the bottom half of the roster...is a sizable expansion of said roster:

1 ~ Perhaps they eliminate the P Squad, and expand the active roster to 61.

2 ~ Perhaps they expand the active roster from 53 to 61, and keep the 8 man P Squad.

3 ~ Perhaps, with the players having so much leverage, yet the owners asking for concessions, the only way to bring an overwhelming majority of players on board is to get extremely aggressive, and expand the active roster to 63, 66, or more.

They may do nothing.

***

But it sure as hell looks likely that the owners are going to have to make some serious concessions at some point, and expanding the rosters ~ while constricting The Cap ~ seems like precisely the move to make, to reduce their Expenditure while at the same time potentially bringing the vast majority of players onto THEIR side.

 

[VJCPatriot]

As usual, I appreciate your enthusiasm and excitement for the draft. This year the Pats are poised on a historic draft that could literally decide their future for the next four to five years. With this much draft ammo, BB has a chance to put the finishing touches on a 14-2 team that appeared ready to make noise in the postseason, before its unceremonious ouster by the Jets. Obviously some upgrades still need to be made, in particular on defense.

I agree with your top picks of Watt and Kenrick Ellis. They both offer a mix of power and athleticism that could give the Pats one of the toughest defensive fronts in the league. I think of Watt as a dancing bear. He has unreal agility for a man of his size and he can absolutely maul people with those violent hands. Kenrick Ellis is a mammoth defender who also displays surprising quickness on film. If Ellis can overcome the character and small school competition concerns, with his blend of size and athleticism he could offer the unusual flexibility to play either inside or outside in different defensive formations. Now there are other prospects out there who could do the job but adding those two might be the start of something very special for the Pats defense.

I do doubt we draft that many runningbacks or tightends, I think a couple of RBs and maybe another TE at the most will be selected considering the current roster. And I am also shocked at the lack of picks at the WR position considering the sheer number of picks you have made otherwise. Deion Branch is good but he's no spring chicken. Tate can be improved upon and Price is a huge question mark and has shown nothing thus far. Welker is the only 'lock' at the position as long as he can keep his 'foot' out of his mouth.

I do think that if the owners insist on 18 games and the players agree to that in a new CBA, that an expanded roster will logically be necessary. But I doubt the new number will be higher than 60. We're only talking about 2 more games after all. What concerns me is how do owners propose to make up for this to players already under contract?

Because in essence they are forcing employees already under contract to do MORE work but still get paid the SAME amount of money. I don't know about you guys but if my employer suddenly said to me, look instead of working 5 days a week, I want you to work 6 days a week, but you're going to get paid the SAME and you won't get any extra benefits... Well that would just NOT FLY well with me. That would ALSO likely violate some contract principles upon which a lawsuit could be based. Because ALL of these contracts had previously been negotiated upon the presumption of a 16 game season.

 

[Off The Grid]

Also your massive influx of players seems to forget the rich and deep impact of the eventual FA market.

That's an interesting subject, but you've made the mistake of assuming that I didn't consider that.

Generally speaking, I consider everything.

And my answer for that is the one I've carried all along: As Rookie contracts mature, we will judiciously trade those players away for fresh Draft Picks: A magnificent Virtuous Cycle.

A lot of the guys you have in red are a lot more valuable and viable than many of the picks you propose. First of all the Pats aren't "projecting" there potential, they know what it is . They have film on all those players vs NFL caliber talent. They have also already invested a lot of time and coaching into the development of those players.

They are NOT going to just throw that away to replace it with a dozen new draft picks of marginal quality and great hopes and dreams.

Correct.

They are not.

In this scenario, they're going to upgrade those dubious talents with significantly superior talents.

That concept is not just mine: It is also Coach Belichick's.

TE''s WB's WE's HB's what ever you want to call them need not apply. Clearly there is an obsession with TE's going on here, but right now we HAVE the right combination of skills at the TE position. We have an elite blocking TE who doesn't embarrass himself in a pass route. We have a move TE (Hernandez) who might eventually rival Dallas Clark, and we have a combo TE in Gronk who could be the best all round TE in the league in a few years. Unfortunately there is only one ball.

Adding to that trio will only dilute the effectiveness of the others.

Incorrect.

It will enhance ~ it will multiply ~ the effectiveness of the others.

Adding to that Trio will expand our options so dynamically that it will wreak HAVOC on opposing Defenses.

It will create a Revolutionary Disruption.

***

When we send no less than FOUR guys who are dangerous as Blockers OR Receivers:

Rob Gronkowski
Aaron Hernandez
Lance Kendricks
Jordan Cameron

...And combine that with a strong, crushing O Line, and a Running Back ~ Shane Vereen, Taiwan Jones, Graig Cooper, or Danny WoodHead ~ who is dynamic as a Runner and as a Receiver...

That, ladies and gentlemen...is a Defensive Coordinator's NIGHTMARE.

Every snap of the ball.

 

[Metaphors]

You made many assumptions, my friend, the vast majority of which were dead wrong.

Folks with a "firm grip on reality" ask questions, rather than make vapid assumptions based entirely on their own fevered imaginations.

Here is my post in bullet form:

• Players below gameday active status on depth charts to start the season typically don't contribute much that season. Not an absolute but also not much of a stretch.
• Anyone not making the 53 man roster has to be cut and pass through waivers where they can be claimed by anyone. Rule for the last several years.
• The "Shadow Roster" is made up of people not on a roster, making them unemployed, unpaid and generally unhappy about the situation. Fact.
• The owners offered 1 roster spot for 2 additional games so they would be unlikely to offer 3+ additional spot for no additional games in the new CBA. Clearly an assumption but not a controversial one.
• Players need practice reps to develop. Fact.
• Practice reps are finite and prioritized based on expected game reps that week. Fact.

I didn't really go out on any limbs. Lay out your "assumptions" (like owners will agree to expanded rosters in the next CBA, there are enough practice snaps for 7 TEs and 7 CBs, etc) and we can see whose perspectives are within spitting distance of reality.

By the way, my imagination can be called many things but "fevered" isn't one of them...and there is an entire spectrum between "vapid" and amusingly eccentric. I consider myself safely in the middle, along with most of humanity.

 

[Off The Grid]

A rich, thoughtfull post, Brother V...Thanks for the Food For Thought.

As usual, I appreciate your enthusiasm and excitement for the draft. This year the Pats are poised on a historic draft that could literally decide their future for the next four to five years. With this much draft ammo, BB has a chance to put the finishing touches on a 14-2 team that appeared ready to make noise in the postseason, before its unceremonious ouster by the Jets. Obviously some upgrades still need to be made, in particular on defense.

I agree with your top picks of Watt and Kenrick Ellis. They both offer a mix of power and athleticism that could give the Pats one of the toughest defensive fronts in the league. I think of Watt as a dancing bear. He has unreal agility for a man of his size and he can absolutely maul people with those violent hands. Kenrick Ellis is a mammoth defender who also displays surprising quickness on film. If Ellis can overcome the character and small school competition concerns, with his blend of size and athleticism he could offer the unusual flexibility to play either inside or outside in different defensive formations. Now there are other prospects out there who could do the job but adding those two might be the start of something very special for the Pats defense.

I could not agree more.

And thank you for being of the 4.7% who spell "Kenrick" correctly.

I do doubt we draft that many runningbacks or tightends, I think a couple of RBs and maybe another TE at the most will be selected considering the current roster.

And I am also shocked at the lack of picks at the WR position considering the sheer number of picks you have made otherwise. Deion Branch is good but he's no spring chicken. Tate can be improved upon and Price is a huge question mark and has shown nothing thus far. Welker is the only 'lock' at the position as long as he can keep his 'foot' out of his mouth.

Ahhh...Excellent point. This deserves an explanation from me.

An integral part of my Draft Strategy is to reduce Wide Receiver's share of the Pie, in favor of an aggressive expansion of the role of the various Tight End Morphications.

Often, I would have us lining up only one Wide Out, or even none.

Obviously, this is a radical and aggressive notion.

I should probably reiterate that this Mock is 100% pure Dream Draft, NOT my prediction of what Coach Bill would do.

I do think that if the owners insist on 18 games and the players agree to that in a new CBA, that an expanded roster will logically be necessary. But I doubt the new number will be higher than 60. We're only talking about 2 more games after all. What concerns me is how do owners propose to make up for this to players already under contract?

Because in essence they are forcing employees already under contract to do MORE work but still get paid the SAME amount of money. I don't know about you guys but if my employer suddenly said to me, look instead of working 5 days a week, I want you to work 6 days a week, but you're going to get paid the SAME and you won't get any extra benefits... Well that would just NOT FLY well with me.

That would ALSO likely violate some contract principles upon which a lawsuit could be based. Because ALL of these contracts had previously been negotiated upon the presumption of a 16 game season.

Excellent points.

I would suggest, however, that the landscape has changed dramatically since 2006, and that because the Economy is horribly constricted, compared to what it was in 2006 ~ when this last agreement was signed ~ that it is actually quite reasonable for the Owners to ask the players to take a pay cut and ~ yes ~ do more work for the same amount of money.

Today, a lot of people are doing more work and getting LESS money than in 2006.

 

[Off The Grid]

You made many assumptions, my friend, the vast majority of which were dead wrong.

I didn't cover every last bit of minutia simply because it's boring to do so.

Folks with a "firm grip on reality" ask questions, rather than make vapid assumptions based entirely on their own fevered imaginations.

Here is my post in bullet form:

• Players below gameday active status on depth charts to start the season typically don't contribute much that season. Not an absolute but also not much of a stretch.
• Anyone not making the 53 man roster has to be cut and pass through waivers where they can be claimed by anyone. Rule for the last several years.
• The "Shadow Roster" is made up of people not on a roster, making them unemployed, unpaid and generally unhappy about the situation. Fact.
• The owners offered 1 roster spot for 2 additional games so they would be unlikely to offer 3+ additional spot for no additional games in the new CBA. Clearly an assumption but not a controversial one.
• Players need practice reps to develop. Fact.
• Practice reps are finite and prioritized based on expected game reps that week. Fact.

I didn't really go out on any limbs.

Lay out your "assumptions" (like owners will agree to expanded rosters in the next CBA, there are enough practice snaps for 7 TEs and 7 CBs, etc) and we can see whose perspectives are within spitting distance of reality.

Oh are THOSE my assumptions?? How interesting!!

How ironic.

The assumptions I called you on were not the facts you just recited.

They were about positions that you chose to imagine I held, based on absolutely nothing.

And I find it amusing that you have spit out a couple more, as I bolded for you, and presented them as my assumptions!!

Forgive me, but while I find your behavior passingly amusing, I have absolutely no interest in continuing a discussion with a guy who repeatedly and persistently spins my alleged positions out of thin air...and then challenges me to defend them!!

 

[TriplecHamp]

jesus you have a lot of free time lol

 

[patchick]

 

[Peachhead]

I hope you're taking your meds as directed. :biggrin2:

 

[BradyToAmendola]

Your excitement for the draft is incredible, Off the Grid, really admire it.

Don't let the haters get to you.

 

[Metaphors]

Expanded 69 Man Roster ~ new CBA

Tight Ends

TE ~ Alge Crumpler
TE ~ Will Yeatman

WB ~ Rob Gronkowski
WB ~ Jordan Cameron
WB ~ Brett Brackett

WE ~ Aaron Hernandez
WE ~ Lance Kendricks

Corner Backs

CB ~ Devin McCourty
CB ~ Leigh Bodden

CB ~ Curtis Marsh
CB ~ Ryan Jones
CB ~ DeMarcus Van Dyke
CB ~ Kyle Arrington
CB ~ Darius Butler

If you aren't assuming an expanded roster size in the new CBA (even though you explicitly stated that) or that there are enough practice snaps for 7 TEs and 7 CBs (even though your roster has 7 TEs and 7 CBs), then I apologize for commenting. Though I'm gratified that you found it mildly amusing despite my vapid observations and fevered imagination. Carry on.

 

[Off The Grid]

Oh are THOSE my assumptions?? How interesting!!

How ironic.

The assumptions I called you on were not the facts you just recited.

They were about positions that you chose to imagine I held, based on absolutely nothing.

And I find it amusing that you have spit out a couple more, as I bolded for you, and presented them as my assumptions!!

Forgive me, but while I find your behavior passingly amusing, I have absolutely no interest in continuing a discussion with a guy who repeatedly and persistently spins my alleged positions out of thin air...and then challenges me to defend them!!

If you aren't assuming an expanded roster size in the new CBA (even though you explicitly stated that) or that there are enough practice snaps for 7 TEs and 7 CBs (even though your roster has 7 TEs and 7 CBs), then I apologize for commenting. Though I'm gratified that you found it mildly amusing despite my vapid observations and fevered imagination. Carry on.

I consider the notion that there isn't a ton of room for Draft Picks to impact our 53 man Roster ~ more like 64-66 with the Practice Squad + Shadow Roster ~ to be pure Urban Legend.

I’m not trying to build a 45 man Roster: I’m trying to build a 60 man Roster.

66, really, including the Shadow Roster.

And I’m going to say 69, allowing for a little expansion with the new CBA.

Expanded 69 Man Roster ~ new CBA

My bad.

I have this silly habit of assuming that others actually read my posts before responding to them!!

* And that mild expansion from our current "Greater Roster" of 63 to 66 or so to 69 was no assumption on my part: It's called "speculation."

And, the last I heard: Training camp comprises 80 men, without anyone wringing their hands that "there won't be enough practice snaps". :snob:

Any chance of you posting something that isn't a distortion??

 

[Off The Grid]

Richard Scary!! LOVE it!!

MAN, that takes me back...

Your excitement for the draft is incredible, Off the Grid, really admire it.

Don't let the haters get to you.

May The God of Your Choice BLESS you, Brother Dez!!

 

[Metaphors]

* And that mild expansion from our current "Greater Roster" of 63 to 66 or so to 69 was no assumption on my part: It's called "speculation."

Ah. Moving on...

And, the last I heard: Training camp comprises 80 men, without anyone wringing their hands that "there won't be enough practice snaps". :snob:

Not talking about camp. A large number of those 80 guys are just bodies that have no chance of sticking so there is little concern over the quality or quantity of field time they get. They have 2-a-days, vet days off and no games to consider until August. Even then they don't gameplan the opposition. Regular season has limited practice time and a focus on gameplans and the opposition. It just isn't practical to have 7 TEs (in addition to 5 WRs) competing for practice snaps...even if you include scout teams.

If the bottom of your 69 man roster were just developmental types, I guess you just let them suck it up and be happy with whatever they get. The CBs you drafted in the 4th round aren't going to be thrilled filling Gatorade cups and waiting for someone to pull a hammy.

And you still didn't address the fact (unless you "speculate" differently) that 16 players are going to have to be cut and pass through waivers, where they can be claimed by anyone. If these guys are as skilled as you believe they are, why wouldn't another team claim them?

Any chance of you posting something that isn't a distortion??

Not doing it intentionally. Please correct any of my distortions and I will beg for forgiveness.

 

[Off The Grid]

Yeah, sounds good, pal!!

 

[jabanero]

Wow, that was fun. Thanks for that.

 

[Off The Grid]

Wow, that was fun. Thanks for that.

And thank YOU, Brother Jabanero!!

I hope you're taking your meds as directed. :biggrin2:

There ain't no cure for what I'VE got, baby!! :rocker: