Patriots Local News:

SOURCE:minotdailynews.com


SOURCE:timesdaily.com


SOURCE:theday.com


SOURCE:canoe.com


SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports


SOURCE:Boston.com


SOURCE:My San Antonio


SOURCE:canoe.com


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NBC Sports Boston


SOURCE:NBC Sports Boston


SOURCE:Sports Illustrated


SOURCE:NBC Sports Boston


SOURCE:Providence Journal


SOURCE:canoe.com


SOURCE:TheAthletic


SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:thereporter.com


SOURCE:canoe.com


SOURCE:Bleacher Report


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:Pats Pulpit

Patsfans.com

Upcoming Opponent:
Next Up: Dolphins
Sun
Sep 13th

Current Patriots Twitter Feed:

**The official Day 2 Patriots Draft Thread**

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by PATSNUTme, Apr 29, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jmt57

    jmt57 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Messages:
    17,143
    Likes Received:
    2,361
    Ratings:
    +8,793
    I never said a word about the d-line or linebackers on that 2001 team, or how many high draft picks were on that team, but thanks for putting words in my mouth (very tasty) ... As for all the high draft picks on the roster, are you implying that you or any people around the league viewed Antowain Smith, Rod Rutledge, Marc Edwards, Brandon Mitchell, and the unproven rookies and first-time starters as elite players at that point in time? That is after all (quality vs quantity) what was being discussed.

    Another person made the contention that 'quality not quantity wins championships', implying that the only way to win in the NFL was to stock your team with elite players, high draft picks, trade up into the first round etc. I countered with the example of the 2001 Patriots.

    Belichick's philosophy has always been about being better than your opponent at every roster spot from #1 to #53, not just #1-5 or #1-10. Our #14 guy is better than your #14 guy, our #23 is better than your #23, etc. That 'quality over quantity' wasn't the theory back then and it isn't the business plan now; anybody that expects differently is going to be sorely disappointed in this team's approach each and every year. If someone is looking for a franchise that focuses on making a big splash with a big name signing every year, my suggestion is to follow the Washington Redskins.

    'Hindsight does count here'? How's that? If we're going to all sit here and make snap judgements on this draft and then make comparisons to the 2001 team then in my opinion no, we do not get the benefit of ten year's worth of hindsight with that squad since the same is not true with the 2011 club. Pick one or the other, but it's got to be the same for both if we're going to compare the two.

    As for that 2001 team I will still say that anybody that contends that they honestly and objectively considered that team to be talented on this day ten years ago is full of it. And I will still argue that the 2001 team was a champion due to 'quantity' (i.e. talent spread throughout the entire roster) and not 'quality' (i.e. a disproportional amount of talent on a very limited number of players.)
     
  2. Ring 6

    Ring 6 PatsFans.com Wall of Fame Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    50,102
    Likes Received:
    5,435
    Ratings:
    +7,899
    Board happy does not mean good draft.
    I'd rather have the better T, the 1st next year and the RB than a lesser T (I'm sure just because he's a T you consider him the same thing) and the guy who doesnt fit out system.
     
  3. BritPat

    BritPat Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,337
    Likes Received:
    281
    Ratings:
    +973
    Carimi woud never have been a LT here. He fits a power team like the Bears or the Cowboys or the Eagles - but never us or the likes of the Colts etc.

    Solder is a perfect fit.
     
  4. BritPat

    BritPat Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,337
    Likes Received:
    281
    Ratings:
    +973
    Right, here's what I think. So far.

    Absolutely love the Solder pick. Slightly more agile than Vollmer, huge upside, perfect attributes for the position. He'll be a cornerstone of the Franchise for a decade. And that's what you pick in the first round.

    Trading away #28 - I was expecting it. With only 5 picks next year we were always going to do something. I was slightly disappointed, and remain so, that Wilkerson (someone we definitely had interest in) was on the board at the time and we didn't want to take the plunge on him. I thought we got very good value for the pick though.

    Ras-I Dowling is a player I like and a player that makes a fair amount of sense considering the struggles we've had at Corner in the last few years. Does it mean the end of Wilhite? Butler? Arrington? I'm not too sure. I do know we have got stronger at the position though, which in a passing league shouldn't be sniffed at. Would I have done something else with the pick though? Probably.

    Really like the Vereen pick. I know we've been talking about defense a lot, but with the amount of "experienced" legs we had at RB other than Bjeepers and Woody, we had to get younger at the position at some point. The value with RB this year was always in the second round and beyond, and I think we took a player that can be the best of his class. He's a complete back, has never had any issues with fumbling the ball, knows how to pass protect, can catch the ball out of the backfield, and is a proper home-run threat. Kevin Faulk but better, hopefully.

    Trading away #60 - not sure I liked this move. I thought we undersold the pick (I'd have asked for a 4th rounder), and then I thought that the put too much value on the player and the position of who we picked. Looking at who went after #74 and #74, I thought we could have upgraded elsewhere.

    So, on to the player we took at #73 - Stevan Ridley. A good player. Not great. Not a home run threat. Big guy, can follow his blockers, can pick up hard yards.....didn't we already have one of those? Not sure I like this at all.

    Ryan Mallet however - yeah, I get that. Has issues both technically and mentally, but he's going to be learning from TFB. Those will disappear. You have to love the upside he's got and the value we got as a Franchise. He's a potential Franchise QB, although I'm not sure I'd have looked at it that way had someone said to me on Thursday evening that by Saturday evening we'd have drafted Ryan Mallet! The only reason he won't succeed is if he doesn't want it enough.

    Trading away #92 (and #125) - this I quite like. We don't now have a pick in R4, but that's offset but absolutely outstripping the Raiders in terms of value for the pick. I'd rather have a second next year (in what's already set to be a stronger Draft, so long as it goes ahead) and another 5th this year, than the two picks we had. The value in this Draft is disappearing rapidly now, and has been since about half way through the third round. I'd rather us throw away just one of the picks rather than both.
     
  5. BritPat

    BritPat Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,337
    Likes Received:
    281
    Ratings:
    +973
    Something about Dowling by the way which I should have mentioned - he could very very easily be our next FS. Something again which should be taken into consideration.
     
  6. townes

    townes Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    917
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0


    This is pretty much how i see it, and I think it went this way to a large degree because they didn't end up liking this draft that much, so they dealt with need and value the best they could. I think the frustration comes from not using 2 firsts, as people get tired of them trading back and want it used, and from not taking a pass rusher, which everyone agrees is a big need and priority. I wanted it as well and i found myself basically disappointed as the draft took place (to this point) but when i look at the players they took i like them, they addressed need-even though not the way we wanted it, and they really bulked up for the next draft, which i'm guessing they believe is stronger. And although no-one wants to hear it right now setting themselves up that well for draft after draft is a key to their long term success.


    I wanted 2 impact players, and they either didn't see a way to get them or felt they weren't worth it, instead they got 3 prospects who will either start soon or play alot, and they got huge value in Mallett and 1st and 2nd round picks to add to next year's draft. Not what i was looking for but still a good job overall.
     
  7. pherein

    pherein In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    4,561
    Likes Received:
    983
    Ratings:
    +2,098
    Wow, your pretty smart to see this coming, and I think you are right. He seems like a Deuce kind of RB to us, something we have been missing, and Cam Jordan is really exciting. I think it might have been worth the price. Really cool of N.E. to let us trade, Im sure they knew what we were after.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

FORUM SEARCH: CLOSE
For searches w/multiple
players add commas
(Ex: "Bill Belichick, Devin McCourty")