Ok…go on record with your draft grade.

[Sect140]

Thanks Sam, I feel better already.

I forgot it was Sam, that explains it.

 

[Sect140]

B, however if the top three picks contribute this season like I think they will, then it could be an A at the end of the season.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Ok, I'll go on record calling this the "A Tale of Two Cities Draft".
The Vrabel draft (It was the best of times)
The Wolf draft (It was the worst of times)
I loved the first 3 picks. I gave them a solid A.
I didn't love the day 3 picks, except for Crownover. I gave it a C-minus.
I hope I am wrong about the day 3 picks but I already had a feeling this draft was very weak after round 3. But I thought we had a chance to get some better players. Of course we shall see but overall this was a little disappointing in the 5-7 range. Moving up for Charles Demmings would have made a difference in my opinion.
My preferences would have been:
5th Round: Domani Jackson or Cyrus Allen (or Kaytron Allen). I only mentioned Jackson since we are in desperate need of CB4 (not sure about Vildor as a UFA signing). It's why I wanted Demmings.
6th Round: Crownover was great
6th Round: Harold Perkins or VJ Payne
7th Round: Nussmeier over Morton
So like I said I thought the draft was weak after the 3rd so I'm not overly disappointed as I figured we'd get players who will be only depth pieces.

I agree and disagree. I really liked the first 2 days and didn't like day 3 as much. What I disagree with is putting iton on Wolf . Wolf is in charge of putting the board together once the scouts have done all their work, but Vrabel, Cowden, and Streicher all play a role in that, and Cowden and Streicher were atill their and had input on day .3 in the same way they had on the first 2 days. The other piece s that everyone knew that Day 3 was going to be much weaker this year, and that the guys taken in those rounds, as well as the UDFA were going to have much tougher time making this roster than they did last season.

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

I agree and disagree. I really liked the first 2 days and didn't like day 3 as much. What I disagree with is putting iton on Wolf . Wolf is in charge of putting the board together once the scouts have done all their work, but Vrabel, Cowden, and Streicher all play a role in that, and Cowden and Streicher were atill their and had input on day .3 in the same way they had on the first 2 days. The other piece s that everyone knew that Day 3 was going to be much weaker this year, and that the guys taken in those rounds, as well as the UDFA were going to have much tougher time making this roster than they did last season.

Was Day 3 really weaker?
Agreed it was weak at the top of the draft, but I think there was plenty of depth in the later rds.
I will defer on whether we made good picks or not, but there was plenty of good prospects available when we picked on Day 3 imo.

 

[DaBruinz]

I think that Crownover, Miller and Prunty offset the picks of Obiazor, Morton, and Hutchins. The first 3 have a very good chance of being contributors.

I agree with @DoubleDeluxe that there were plenty of good prospects available, even late, that the Patriots could have added instead of those 3. Guys who fit the mold of "violent players" and would likely have a better chance of sticking around on the PS.

 

[mgteich]

Was Day 3 really weaker?
Agreed it was weak at the top of the draft, but I think there was plenty of depth in the later rds.
I will defer on whether we made good picks or not, but there was plenty of good prospects available when we picked on Day 3 imo.

There are always plenty of good prospects, especially in the eyes of fans.

The open question is whether the later rounds were worse than the norm.

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

There are always plenty of good prospects, especially in the eyes of fans.

The open question is whether the later rounds were worse than the norm.

Right.
I don’t think it was.
First rd was weaker, but overall I thought the depth, especially in the later rds was actually good.
However I don’t evaluate college players for living, unfortunately.

 

[rochrist]

Also by the way, "crownover" sounds like either a pastry or a childbirth complication

Or a whisky.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Was Day 3 really weaker?
Agreed it was weak at the top of the draft, but I think there was plenty of depth in the later rds.
I will defer on whether we made good picks or not, but there was plenty of good prospects available when we picked on Day 3 imo.

Actually I shouldn't have said that because I can't back it up. Last year I paid a great deal of attention to the whole of the draft, so I knew what was going on in later rounds. This year I have been way to busy to do much more than look at the top 100 or so prospects, and didn't know **** about the rest of the draft. I conflated poor draft depth with poor knowledge of the prospects. So that's on me.

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

Actually I shouldn't have said that because I can't back it up. Last year I paid a great deal of attention to the whole of the draft, so I knew what was going on in later rounds. This year I have been way to busy to do much more than look at the top 100 or so prospects, and didn't know **** about the rest of the draft. I conflated poor draft depth with poor knowledge of the prospects. So that's on me.

All good. All the pre-draft talk was how it was a weak draft class, and it was at the top.
Middle and late rds seemed to have a lot of good players still available every time we were on the clock.