- Joined
- May 1, 2008
- Messages
- 22,465
- Reaction score
- 15,338
I think most of us agree that the majority of investment in the past 3 drafts has been on offense, and that depth on defense has taken a back seat. @DaBruinz has recently highlighted this:
I think most of us agree the majority of draft resources for 2027 should be focused on defense.
LB is particularly weak, especially going into 2027. There are at least 2 potential early targets right now in Sammy Brown and Kyngstonn Viliamu-asa, potentially a third in Chris Cole. But off-ball LB is not generally considered a "premium" position, and tends to be devalued. There is also solid depth at the position. Good LBs were available day 3 in 2026 (Kyle Louis, Kaleb Elarms-Orr, Jimmy Rolder, Justin Jefferson), and are likely to be in 2027.
The same arguments apply at safety, which also tends to be devalued, and which is potentially very deep for 2027.
DL and CB are both in better shape than LB right now, right they are "premium" positions and generally considered harder to fill.
You can make an argument that elite secondaries and DLs have both been among the key elements of many SB winners. The 2013 Seahawks "Legion of Boom", the 2014 Pats, and the 2015 Broncos "No Fly Zone" are just a few examples of dominant secondaries helping fuel a championship run. The 2007 and 2022 Giants and 2025 Eagles used dominant defensive lines to power their runs.
Adding a top CB to Christian Gonzalez, Carlton Davis (no guarantee beyond 2026, and doubtful beyond 2027) and Marcus Jones could give the Patriots a secondary to rival 2014. Leonard Moore will be long gone, but Ellis Robinson IV, Zavien Brown, and Kelly Jones are all options. Miami's OJ Frederique could possibly join them.
The IDL is a strength with Milt Williams and Christian Barmore. But adding a player like A'Mauri Washington, Will Echoles or Ahmad Moten could make it dominant. Seattle's IDL was key to their SB run in 2025, just as Philly's was in 2024.
If the choice arises, and players are similarly graded, what makes more sense with our top pick: to shore up a weakness early, or overload at a more valued position that is stronger, and then address the weakness later?
I think most of us agree the majority of draft resources for 2027 should be focused on defense.
LB is particularly weak, especially going into 2027. There are at least 2 potential early targets right now in Sammy Brown and Kyngstonn Viliamu-asa, potentially a third in Chris Cole. But off-ball LB is not generally considered a "premium" position, and tends to be devalued. There is also solid depth at the position. Good LBs were available day 3 in 2026 (Kyle Louis, Kaleb Elarms-Orr, Jimmy Rolder, Justin Jefferson), and are likely to be in 2027.
The same arguments apply at safety, which also tends to be devalued, and which is potentially very deep for 2027.
DL and CB are both in better shape than LB right now, right they are "premium" positions and generally considered harder to fill.
You can make an argument that elite secondaries and DLs have both been among the key elements of many SB winners. The 2013 Seahawks "Legion of Boom", the 2014 Pats, and the 2015 Broncos "No Fly Zone" are just a few examples of dominant secondaries helping fuel a championship run. The 2007 and 2022 Giants and 2025 Eagles used dominant defensive lines to power their runs.
Adding a top CB to Christian Gonzalez, Carlton Davis (no guarantee beyond 2026, and doubtful beyond 2027) and Marcus Jones could give the Patriots a secondary to rival 2014. Leonard Moore will be long gone, but Ellis Robinson IV, Zavien Brown, and Kelly Jones are all options. Miami's OJ Frederique could possibly join them.
The IDL is a strength with Milt Williams and Christian Barmore. But adding a player like A'Mauri Washington, Will Echoles or Ahmad Moten could make it dominant. Seattle's IDL was key to their SB run in 2025, just as Philly's was in 2024.
If the choice arises, and players are similarly graded, what makes more sense with our top pick: to shore up a weakness early, or overload at a more valued position that is stronger, and then address the weakness later?
