Value at 21 and 52

[spacecrime]

Second Round is wide open IMO.

Not a tight end though, please.

Why all these anti-tight end posts? Having three quality TEs has been a cornerstone of the Pats from 2002 on. And in 2001 it wasn't because BB didn't draft enough TEs. He just drafted them too low and they didn't make the grade.

Our offense is predicated on having 2 TEs on the field, each of whom can block or catch. For that you need there starting quality TEs so your offense doesn't fall apart when one gets hurt.

Right now we have 2 TEs. Next year only one, unless Graham is extended.

It is easier to find RBs and LBs than to find a TE who can catch AND block.

I would be amazed if we did not draft a TE on day one, and maybe a second on day 2 as a flyer.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

I would be amazed if we did not draft a TE on day one, and maybe a second on day 2 as a flyer.

Yep. We could always sign a Jed Weaver but we have a few gaping holes on the roster just waiting to be filled in the draft and a #3 TE with the upside to replace Graham in 2007 is one of them.

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Well, not exactly, Mgtiech.

I feel the lower 20's represent decent value slots for LB's in the first round, so a trade down would still yield a good player with an extra pick for a bonus. In the first round in general, the clear 1st round value comes in the first 10-13 spots so trading down would be be a sound move since 21 will not bring a hugely different player than, say, number 28.

Second round has lot's of value around our pick - I think safeties especially would bring a good value there. But if we're looking for a RB in the second round, the better value position would be late in the second round where Calhoun, Norwood, Drew, Washington, would be great picks. It is a bit of splitting hairs I'll admit, but Norwood at number 60 would be a steal while at 42 he could be a bit of a reach.