Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft picks

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

The more I think about this, the more I like this move. It is clear how much Belichick wanted him based on what he gave up. I guess you can argue it was a desperation move, but Belichick isn't usually one to make moves out of desperation. Burgess has the measurables to be a very good OLB in the 3-4. Not guaranteed to make the transition, but he has the tools to. Plus, he is somewhat familiar with the Pats' defense. So the learning curve will be a lot less.

I know everyone focuses on his pass rush abilities, but from what I can see he is pretty good vs. the run and many of his weaknesses against the run as DE are diminished as a OLB. Besides, don't forget that Colvin came in here weak against the run and turned out to be pretty good with the Pats (not great, but more than servicable).

I think Burgess could potentially be an every down OLB.

I couldn't agree more. I don't think the Pats would fork over a 3rd round and a conditional 4th/5th for a situational pass rusher. I know guys that will give you the potential of 6-10 sacks a year are at a premium in the NFL, but b/c BB values well-rounded players, I think he recognizes that Burgess can bring more to the team than just exclusively lining up on 3rd and 6+ Will he play 85% of the snaps as Vrabel did in 08? Until he picks up the defense, no. But he played in a pretty complicated scheme in Philly and obviously has had some 3-4 exposure in OAK so theoretically that type of experience should help him get acclimated quicky here.

My .02$

 

[mesoslo]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

If the patriots play more of a 4 man front, Burgess's inability to stop the run will not burn the patriots.

 

[N.Eman]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

alrighty! 1 step in the right direction. If he can give us his production of 05-06 seasons we should be ok with him at OLB. Great veteran pickup. Hope he adjusts pretty well and quick to our playbook.

 

[makoute]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

Do we know Burgess will supplant Woods? Maybe this move will allow the Pats to move AD inside to replace Bruschi and Burgess will take ADs OLB spot.

Yes, I think he will.

 

[mayoclinic]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

The more I think about this, the more I like this move. It is clear how much Belichick wanted him based on what he gave up. I guess you can argue it was a desperation move, but Belichick isn't usually one to make moves out of desperation. Burgess has the measurables to be a very good OLB in the 3-4. Not guaranteed to make the transition, but he has the tools to. Plus, he is somewhat familiar with the Pats' defense. So the learning curve will be a lot less.

I know everyone focuses on his pass rush abilities, but from what I can see he is pretty good vs. the run and many of his weaknesses against the run as DE are diminished as a OLB. Besides, don't forget that Colvin came in here weak against the run and turned out to be pretty good with the Pats (not great, but more than servicable).

I think Burgess could potentially be an every down OLB.

I would agree with this. I would see Burgess being used situationally at first, but as he absorbs more of the defense and the 3-4 I could see him potentially becoming an every down OLB by the end of the season. I could see him being very a better version of Colvin - stronger, meaner, and better against the run.

If Guyton continues to improve and Burgess adapts to the 3-4, then a starting rotation of Burgess-Mayo-Guyton-Thomas could be extremely potent. BB could also use Burgess and/or Thomas at DE in some 4-3 schemes, or run a "big" 4-3 with Burgess-Mayo-Thomas at LB and Warren-Wilfork-Brace-Seymour at DE. Add in the improved depth in the secondary, and the defense looks to be potentially the best since 2003.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

If Guyton continues to improve and Burgess adapts to the 3-4, then a starting rotation of Burgess-Mayo-Guyton-Thomas could be extremely potent. BB could also use Burgess and/or Thomas at DE in some 4-3 schemes, or run a "big" 4-3 with Burgess-Mayo-Thomas at LB and Warren-Wilfork-Brace-Seymour at DE. Add in the improved depth in the secondary, and the defense looks to be potentially the best since 2003.

No matter how you slice it, that is a sick, sick, sick front 7.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

The more I think about this, the more I like this move. It is clear how much Belichick wanted him based on what he gave up. I guess you can argue it was a desperation move, but Belichick isn't usually one to make moves out of desperation. Burgess has the measurables to be a very good OLB in the 3-4. Not guaranteed to make the transition, but he has the tools to. Plus, he is somewhat familiar with the Pats' defense. So the learning curve will be a lot less.

I know everyone focuses on his pass rush abilities, but from what I can see he is pretty good vs. the run and many of his weaknesses against the run as DE are diminished as a OLB. Besides, don't forget that Colvin came in here weak against the run and turned out to be pretty good with the Pats (not great, but more than servicable).

I think Burgess could potentially be an every down OLB.

I dont see it that way.
First, I dont think we gave up all that much, so I cant assume it indicates anything clearly about BBs feelings.
I think it indicates that this was the price, and BB felt that the player could help enough to be worth that price. A sub package DE who plays 50% of the snaps is a very valuable player. More valuable than the 2nd ILB that we spend so much time worrying about.

How is he familiar with the Pats defense? He played in Philly and Oakland.

I dont know that what a player can do is dependent on whether fans general impressions of a different player were right or wrong.

I don't get the problem with accepting that we gave up a 3rd and a 5th for a guy who will play half the snaps but doesnt have a position in the base D.
I heard Howie Long say yesterday that in his final season he played 800+ snaps. Last year a team (can't remember the team, maybe GB) got to the end of the season and their DL was worn out because they didnt have enough quality players for a rotation. Those guys had played 380 snaps. Those are starters.

If Burgess was going to be a starting OLB that gets double digit sacks and plays every down first he wouldnt be on the market and if he were he would have cost a lot more than this.

We got what we paid for, and the truth is it is also exactly what we needed.

 

[BradyManny]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

Football Outsiders has Burgess in the top 10 for QB hurries last year, despite playing in only 10 games.

That tells me he's getting after the QB...maybe when surrounded by better talent, those hurries will turn into sacks once again.

 

[BradyManny]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

If Burgess was going to be a starting OLB that gets double digit sacks and plays every down first he wouldnt be on the market and if he were he would have cost a lot more than this.

We got what we paid for, and the truth is it is also exactly what we needed.

I agree the price isn't as steep as some are making it out to be, but disagree that Burgess will only be in for 50% of the snaps. While he's known has a QB killer, apparently he's good against the run, presuming he also can drop in coverage with some ability, there's no reason for him not to compete against Woods for the OLB spot opposite AD in the base defense. We're talking about a two-time Pro Bowler versus a guy who has only started a handful of games - experience in the system is valuable, but so is talent, production, and experience in the league. It should be a good competition.

 

[captain stone]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

Let's do an exercise. Which of BB's 3rd and 5th (assuming we get one which we will) round picks actually contributed as a starter/sub-pacakge guy (which Burgess will be)

I know this is a very simplistic way to look at it, but whatever it's fun

3rd round draft picks under BB (not including 2008 or 2009-jury still out on O'Connell and Crable):

2006 (none in 07): David Thomas (0 for 1) (this one is kind of arguable)
2005: Ellis Hobbs, Nick Kaczur (2 for 2)
2004: Guss Scott (0 for 1)
2003: none
2002: none
2001: Brock Williams (0 for 1)
2000: JR Redmond (0 for 1) (although he did really help us with those three catches in SB 36)
So, we've gone 2 for 6 in the third rd under BB

let's move onto 5th rounders

2007: Clint Oldenburg (0 for 1)
2006: Ryan O'Callaghan (0 for 1)
2005: Ryan Claridge (0 for 1)
2004: PK Sam (0 for 1)
2003: Dan Koppen (1! for 1)
2002: none
2001: Hakim Akbar (0 for 1)
2000: Dave Stachelski, Jeff Marriott (0 for 2)
So, we've gone 1 for 8 in the fifth under BB

My assumption is right, looks like a damn fine trade to me!!!!

If you want to break it down into ratings I can do that, screw it, who needs sleep

3 is a starter for at least a full season, 2 is a guy who was like the first guy off the bench playing almost as many snaps as a starter, 1 is a role player who stuck for a little while

Thomas gets a 1, Hobbs gets a 3, Kaczur gets a 3, Redmond I'll give a 1
So, out of 6 draft picks (18 available points) we get a total of 8. What does this mean? Well I view Burgess as at least a 2, possibly a 3, so let's give him a 2.5. We averaged a 1.3 on our 3rd rounders.

Koppen gets a 3, that's all we get in the fifth round. That's out of 8 picks, so we averaged a 0.375 on our fifth rounders.

Yeah, looks like a darn good trade to me!

Justifying the price paid for somebody who is 31 years old, has declining sack totals, has hardly ever played the position he will be asked to play, and is in the final year of his contract, by reminding us how often the FO has swung & missed during the rounds in
which that price will be paid, doesn't exactly inspire maximum confidence in the FO's abilities in either the drafting or the trading departments.

Then again, considering how well I think that Bill has performed over the last 5/6 drafts, maybe I should hope that he trades away all of his draft picks for experienced vets, as George Allen did with the 'Skins. Because as of now, Burgess is our 2nd-best, if not best, pass-rusher...and he hasn't even played a down for us yet.

 

[Patriots2001]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

I can't wait til kickoff. Im already planning the football day feast every weekend..Here comes 50 lbs of beer and suausage..WoooHoooo let the games begin.:singing:

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

I really like this trade as, if Burgess works out in this defense, our pass rush concerns will be alleviated with AD on the other side. But damn, the way some of you are reacting to this, you'd think Kraft just called Doc Brown up and he teleported Lawrence Taylor in his prime back here to sign with the Pats for next season.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

I dont see it that way.
First, I dont think we gave up all that much, so I cant assume it indicates anything clearly about BBs feelings.
I think it indicates that this was the price, and BB felt that the player could help enough to be worth that price. A sub package DE who plays 50% of the snaps is a very valuable player. More valuable than the 2nd ILB that we spend so much time worrying about.

How is he familiar with the Pats defense? He played in Philly and Oakland.

I dont know that what a player can do is dependent on whether fans general impressions of a different player were right or wrong.

I don't get the problem with accepting that we gave up a 3rd and a 5th for a guy who will play half the snaps but doesnt have a position in the base D.
I heard Howie Long say yesterday that in his final season he played 800+ snaps. Last year a team (can't remember the team, maybe GB) got to the end of the season and their DL was worn out because they didnt have enough quality players for a rotation. Those guys had played 380 snaps. Those are starters.

If Burgess was going to be a starting OLB that gets double digit sacks and plays every down first he wouldnt be on the market and if he were he would have cost a lot more than this.

We got what we paid for, and the truth is it is also exactly what we needed.

Howies math must be wrong. 800/10 games is on average 80 defensive plays he is out there. No way he played that many.The whole D was out there for 1045 snaps/16 = 65 per game.

I don't argue the compensation. Picks are picks.

 

[mesoslo]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

I agree the price isn't as steep as some are making it out to be, but disagree that Burgess will only be in for 50% of the snaps. While he's known has a QB killer, apparently he's good against the run, presuming he also can drop in coverage with some ability, there's no reason for him not to compete against Woods for the OLB spot opposite AD in the base defense. We're talking about a two-time Pro Bowler versus a guy who has only started a handful of games - experience in the system is valuable, but so is talent, production, and experience in the league. It should be a good competition.

He is not good against the run, he has speed to pursuit the run if the run is away from him, but if they run it at him he sucks. He played DE and weights about 260. Tackles and gaurds easily push him off the line.

If he played LB and uses his mobility and speed to fill running gaps then yes he is good, but at the point of attack he sucks.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

I dont see it that way.
First, I dont think we gave up all that much, so I cant assume it indicates anything clearly about BBs feelings.
I think it indicates that this was the price, and BB felt that the player could help enough to be worth that price. A sub package DE who plays 50% of the snaps is a very valuable player. More valuable than the 2nd ILB that we spend so much time worrying about.

How is he familiar with the Pats defense? He played in Philly and Oakland.

I dont know that what a player can do is dependent on whether fans general impressions of a different player were right or wrong.

I don't get the problem with accepting that we gave up a 3rd and a 5th for a guy who will play half the snaps but doesnt have a position in the base D.
I heard Howie Long say yesterday that in his final season he played 800+ snaps. Last year a team (can't remember the team, maybe GB) got to the end of the season and their DL was worn out because they didnt have enough quality players for a rotation. Those guys had played 380 snaps. Those are starters.

If Burgess was going to be a starting OLB that gets double digit sacks and plays every down first he wouldnt be on the market and if he were he would have cost a lot more than this.

We got what we paid for, and the truth is it is also exactly what we needed.

How is he familiar with the Pats' defense? Because Rob Ryan was his defensive coordinator the last four years and Ryan snuck out of the facilities before Belichick could put him in the brain erasing machine. You do realize that Ryan served under Belichick from 2000-2003 and that Ryan tried unsuccessfully to install the Pats' defense in Oakland (they didn't have the personnel to run it full time especially on the d-line).

Also, Burgess is going to play OLB. I don't know if you have been following, but Belichick has been trying to get a veteran OLB for most of the offseason. Burgess may play DE on the rare occassions that the Pats switch to a 4-3, but he will primarily play OLB and should start even if Belichick rotates the position.

As for Burgess being an OLB who gets double digit sacks, other than Vrabel in 2007 when have the Pats ever gotten that. Burgess is in the last year of his contract and wanting to be paid. The Pats are renting to own here. They got into a bidding war with the Eagles for his services. The Pats did give up a lot actually.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

He is not good against the run, he has speed to pursuit the run if the run is away from him, but if they run it at him he sucks. He played DE and weights about 260. Tackles and gaurds easily push him off the line.

If he played LB and uses his mobility and speed to fill running gaps then yes he is good, but at the point of attack he sucks.

He won't be put in the same situation against the run with us as he was with the Raiders. Especially if Warren is healthy to start the season.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

I agree the price isn't as steep as some are making it out to be, but disagree that Burgess will only be in for 50% of the snaps. While he's known has a QB killer, apparently he's good against the run, presuming he also can drop in coverage with some ability, there's no reason for him not to compete against Woods for the OLB spot opposite AD in the base defense. We're talking about a two-time Pro Bowler versus a guy who has only started a handful of games - experience in the system is valuable, but so is talent, production, and experience in the league. It should be a good competition.

I asked this earlier, and I didn't see anyone answer it (my apologies if someone did and I missed it), so I'll ask you:

Other than the Welker deal, which involved a RFA situation, what trades have seen BB give up more for a player than this one? Moss was a 4th, Gabriel was a 5th, Starks was a 3rd, etc..... When you say that the price isn't "as steep as some are making it out to be", you seem to be speaking in the face of all Patriots history under Belichick.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

Well this is the way I see it:

Burgess is fading, but, he will provide enough in terms of plays on the field, and production while the younger guys get it figured out. Either through injury or ineffectiveness he'll fade off during the season. He'll get cut prior to the start of the 2010 season.

Actually, he won't get cut but will rather leave via free agency at the end of the year. He's going to want more than the Patriots will pay him (same as he had problems with Oakland). Then the Patriots will potentially get a compensation pick for him reducing the effective price of the trade.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

BTW, unless Belichick suddenly got stupid, he would have had spoken to Burgess and made sure he was going to end his hold out if he was traded. That means Burgess was going to have to be happy about what his role is with the Pats. Since he is in a contract year, I guarantee you he wouldn't be happy as a sub especially with his old team hot on getting him back. I am sure he was guaranteed at least a strong shot at starting.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Pats acquire DE/OLB Derrick Burgess for draft pick

I asked this earlier, and I didn't see anyone answer it (my apologies if someone did and I missed it), so I'll ask you:

Other than the Welker deal, which involved a RFA situation, what trades have seen BB give up more for a player than this one? Moss was a 4th, Gabriel was a 5th, Starks was a 3rd, etc..... When you say that the price isn't "as steep as some are making it out to be", you seem to be speaking in the face of all Patriots history under Belichick.

Pats dished a 2nd rounder (#56) for Corey Dillion.