Way too early (now right on time) draft board

[I.M. Fletcher]

It is surprising to see how Pats fans who admire and observe BB closely still covet splashy EDGE guys. I seriously doubt BB would ever take Garrett or any edge guy at a high 1rd pick let alone #1-3.

Take a franchise QB or trade down - that would happen most of the time. We don't have much of the pattern of course..

Re. Garrett: he was basically non existent against Alabama. Cam Robinson owned him mostly 1-1. OJ Howard helped at times but also owned him 1-1 (and moved the chains as well).

Not that we don't know it from Pats games but here is a nice film on how the extraordinary edge player becomes virtually a non factor.


(There is a nice slow motion of Robinson owning Garrett at 4:38. It happened all day)

As commentator puts it nicely about Garrett “ he has one job and he does it well.“ The problem is one job is not too difficult to take away esp. if you take so much cap space that you can't have good company around you.

On the other hand its not easy to take away the job from QB, OL, versatile DL, CB, S, impact LB, TE.
__

Since taking over BB drafted only one pure edge guy in the first 2 rounds (in 17 drafts!) - Chandler Jones at #21 and while being productive (and spectacular) rusher we know how his story here ended . because his only job (esp. setting the edge) was to easily taken away.

He did draft a couple of excellent DL rushers very high - Seymour at #6 and even traded up for Warren at #13 (and recently Easley) but this are versatile 300lb guys with more than one use (rush, stuff, push..).

Here's what he took in those 17 drafts in first two rounds?
10 - DB
7 - DT/DL
5 - LB
4 - WR
3 - TE
3 - OT
2 - IOL
2 - RB
1 - QB

Of course this were mostly not high picks and its always about personalities as well but this is a long enough record to give us some clue.

So if he would actually use such a high pick (id guess he would trade down) I seriously doubt it would be on any pure edge guy. Its just not economical. He can win with Ninkovich's, Long's, Flower's etc. as well.

If he had to use it Id bet on Allen, Solomon Thomas, Hooker or Foster, possibly even Robinson, OJ Howard, Fournette, Peppers or one of the top CBs.

I am not doing this post justice by only making a small comment, but one thing to note about the Bama game, they ran away from him the entire day. Literally. Every play went over the right guard or tackle. Robinson did handle him in passing situations, but the Bama offense was t really set up for long developing plays anyways.

You would love to see more splash plays, but that looked like a gameplan to not let the other teams best player beat you.

I do agree with the rest of your sentiments. It is difficult to know what BB would value higher and where he considers to be the best cost effectiveness earlier in the draft. We have just had so few drafts to build much of a relevant understanding.

 

[long distance]

I am not doing this post justice by only making a small comment, but one thing to note about the Bama game, they ran away from him the entire day. Literally. Every play went over the right guard or tackle. Robinson did handle him in passing situations, but the Bama offense was t really set up for long developing plays anyways.

You would love to see more splash plays, but that looked like a gameplan to not let the other teams best player beat you.

I do agree with the rest of your sentiments. It is difficult to know what BB would value higher and where he considers to be the best cost effectiveness earlier in the draft. We have just had so few drafts to build much of a relevant understanding.

You're perfectly right . and that's just the point to me. One splashy edge player is not worth that much IMHO because you can take him away/ avoid him relatively easy. The Pats did that to Von Miller at Mile High with #135 pick Cannon who everybody here wanted cut 5 months ago.

It's much harder to gameplan in order to completely take away elite guy at other positions because QBs, DBs, LBs, DLs especially if versatile will always find away to be productive so all you can do is limit them. You can take away Sherman by avoiding him but that's almost half of the field you're sacrificing..

That's all very simplified thinking of course but it can show some general idea.


EDIT: Don't get me wrong: i do believe edge will be position of certain need in this draft for Pats no matter what happens in FA . and Id certainly welcome a good addition or two . I wouldn't mind a guy like Taco or Takk at #32 (esp. if Pats get other high picks in trade) . but i wouldn't be surprised if BB takes edge guys lower

 

[I.M. Fletcher]

You're perfectly right . and that's just the point to me. One splashy edge player is not worth that much IMHO because you can take him away/ avoid him relatively easy. The Pats did that to Von Miller at Mile High with #135 pick Cannon who everybody here wanted cut 5 months ago.

It's much harder to gameplan in order to completely take away elite guy at other positions because QBs, DBs, LBs, DLs especially if versatile will always find away to be productive so all you can do is limit them. You can take away Sherman by avoiding him but that's almost half of the field you're sacrificing..

That's all very simplified thinking of course but it can show some general idea.

I just think that's a reality for any position but qb.

CB? Throw it to another receiver.
DE? Run the other way, or two blockers
Wr? Help over the top.
Lt? Move your pass rushers to the other side

No matter what, you want the best possible players at every position. What I think it comes down to is it being better having 3 pretty good players instead of one great one.

all it takes is one play where a dirty play happens, and all that draft capital and cap space to look rather poorly spent.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Garrett was hurt, doubled, chipped, tribled and got no favors from his coaches in terms of moving him around.

I'd love to hear solid analysis about Allen, Hooker etc bc imho most really don't break em down that well.

Who's the first guy off the ball for Bama?

Who is facing elite comp across from them every play?

How does Allen compare to past DT's taken that high?

Will he dominate w/out the array of talent everywhere around him?

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Garrett is a baby and 6'6 / 265. Once he gets actual coaching, fills out and perfects technique he'll be an all pro every other year.

Heard a lot of the same w/ Bosa.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Check out @PFF_Steve's Tweet: out @PFF_Steve's Tweet: out @PFF_Steve's Tweet:

 

[I.M. Fletcher]

I don't think @long distance concerns about Garrett are out of place. Garrett has every tool imaginable, but didn't show up much in big games, and only took over games against really low competition.

He is the very clear top pick, but I was hoping to see a bigger step forward this year than what transpired. Part of that was definitely the injury, but he's going to get chopped like that a lot in the pros, and there won't be much grace given anymore.

 

[Gabriel_p94]

You're perfectly right . and that's just the point to me. One splashy edge player is not worth that much IMHO because you can take him away/ avoid him relatively easy. The Pats did that to Von Miller at Mile High with #135 pick Cannon who everybody here wanted cut 5 months ago.

It's much harder to gameplan in order to completely take away elite guy at other positions because QBs, DBs, LBs, DLs especially if versatile will always find away to be productive so all you can do is limit them. You can take away Sherman by avoiding him but that's almost half of the field you're sacrificing..

That's all very simplified thinking of course but it can show some general idea.


EDIT: Don't get me wrong: i do believe edge will be position of certain need in this draft for Pats no matter what happens in FA . and Id certainly welcome a good addition or two . I wouldn't mind a guy like Taco or Takk at #32 (esp. if Pats get other high picks in trade) . but i wouldn't be surprised if BB takes edge guys lower

I get what your saying and for the most part i agree with you. In no way would i trade any assets to be put into position to take garrett, now if we somehow trade JG and garret somehow falls to us (i know unlikely to happen) i would not hesitate to take him.

But when you say that a player like him is easily game planned for and can be taken out of a game easily is something I dont entirely agree with. When playing against von miller it was an outstanding game by Cannon, ( who I will admit that I wanted to be cut in the offseason, I was way wrong) but lets say that cannon wasnt able to handle him all alone for the game. If thats the case then now we have to put the tight end to help, a rb to chip him, or an extra offensive linemen to slow him down. With all those resources to just stop one player there is no way that BB is able to play the game he wants to play. Also, if a player is demanding that much attention from a team the hope is that another player is able to capitalize on the lack of attention that is being paid to him.

Now in the case of garrett, robinson did handle him very well for the most part. But you can see bama avoided his side of the field while running. So even though he didnt have success in getting to the qb his presence was still felt on alabamas play calling. And if you look at some of tape linked earlier from the bama/a&m game from 2015 there were a few plays where garrett completely blew up robinson.

But I do see your point on splashy edge guys, but i dont see that from garrett. I believe he will be able to be productive against the pass and the rush.

 

[long distance]

I just think that's a reality for any position but qb.

CB? Throw it to another receiver.
DE? Run the other way, or two blockers
Wr? Help over the top.
Lt? Move your pass rushers to the other side

No matter what, you want the best possible players at every position. What I think it comes down to is it being better having 3 pretty good players instead of one great one.

all it takes is one play where a dirty play happens, and all that draft capital and cap space to look rather poorly spent.

While not disagreeing, I would argue that it is generally easier to limit the impact and production of a player like Chandler Jones (or Garrett, Von Miller if you like) than f.e. Wilfork, Seymour, Gronk, Mankins, McCourty, Mayo, Bruschi ..

Also shying away from Sherman narrows one's playbook (and the field) more than in Von's case. Again it is very simplified thinking but I see why BB invests more in other positions .. and that was the point of that post.

*

Yes, the economy of 1 elite player < 2-3 good players in football should be clear to all .. so much more since here you have 22 starters (+ST). Surprisingly .. its not. BB takes the benefits.

__

Let me repeat a post from another thread to further illustrate this key point:

Shortly after the sale, Bob Kraft’s Harvard Business School-educated son, Jonathan, gave a speech before the 1776 Quarterback Club of New England—a prominent fan group that hosted an annual awards banquet—–and spelled out the family’s vision for a team that had won just 19 of 80 games from 1989-1993.

The new salary cap that had just been introduced, the younger Kraft explained, was one of the biggest reasons they purchased the club. He believed there were inefficiencies in the market and used a hypothetical to illustrate his point.

Player A makes $2 million per year and is 10% better than Player B, who makes $500,000. Too many teams, Kraft argued, were committing to the marginally better player at the higher price. The Patriots, he said, would prefer the cheaper player in nearly every instance.

_

The drooling over splashy plays and players, the fantasy and mocks of it all influence too many decision makers . and Pats are staying sober, taking advantage of the drunken league . and keep winning what seems like against all odds. But the odds are there - made clear in quoted paragraph.

 

[BobDigital]

It is surprising to see how Pats fans who admire and observe BB closely still covet splashy EDGE guys. I seriously doubt BB would ever take Garrett or any edge guy at a high 1rd pick let alone #1-3.

Take a franchise QB or trade down - that would happen most of the time. We don't have much of the pattern of course..

Re. Garrett: he was basically non existent against Alabama. Cam Robinson owned him mostly 1-1. OJ Howard helped at times but also owned him 1-1 (and moved the chains as well).

Not that we don't know it from Pats games but here is a nice film on how the extraordinary edge player becomes virtually a non factor.


(There is a nice slow motion of Robinson owning Garrett at 4:38. It happened all day)

As commentator puts it nicely about Garrett “ he has one job and he does it well.“ The problem is one job is not too difficult to take away esp. if you take so much cap space that you can't have good company around you.

On the other hand its not easy to take away the job from QB, OL, versatile DL, CB, S, impact LB, TE.
__

Since taking over BB drafted only one pure edge guy in the first 2 rounds (in 17 drafts!) - Chandler Jones at #21 and while being productive (and spectacular) rusher we know how his story here ended . because his only job (esp. the setting the edge part) was too easily taken away.

He did draft a couple of excellent DL rushers very high - Seymour at #6 and even traded up for Warren at #13 (and recently Easley) but these are versatile 300lb guys with more than one use (rush, stuff, push..).

Here's what he took in those 17 drafts in first two rounds:
10 - DB
7 - DT/DL
5 - LB
4 - WR
3 - TE
3 - OT
2 - IOL
2 - RB
1 - QB

Of course this were mostly not high picks and its always about personalities as well but this is a long enough record to give us some clue.

So if he would actually use such a high pick (id guess he would trade down) I seriously doubt it would be on any pure edge guy. Its just not economical. He can win with Ninkovich's, Long's, Flower's etc. as well.

If he had to use it Id bet on Allen, Solomon Thomas, Hooker or Foster, possibly even Robinson, OJ Howard, Fournette, Peppers or one of the top CBs.

Good post and I tend to agree. However that was early on and I have been able to look more a CBs since then and I did come to the conclusion there are a few I'd take higher up. I agree BB doesn't like to over spend on DE particularly just pass rush specialist and neither do i. If I spend on a first round DE it is someone who can stop the run as well.

However I did both my mock drafts under the belief our offense will not need much if anything next year as i see most of the same unit returning. So that leaves fewer spots you look to draft high and i think most of the needs are on defense anyway as i am confident this offense will figure it out.

If Branch comes back DT is a need still but not as much and do we plan to use 3 straight first round picks on DT? I don't think so. LB is a huge need but if we trade Jimmy G i assume Foster doesn't fall in range of that pick (he goes top 4 the more i think about it) and no LB I'd take till 32 at least. I could see the Pats not taking a DE till round 3 but it is just such a need. Sheard gone. Nink old. Long old.

It is possible we see other free agent DEs but as of now the only DE on the roster I have penciled it that i know will be effective is Flowers. It is a very big need in a draft with DE talent.

That is why I have personally looked at these DEs so closely.

 

[long distance]

To conclude my point re situation at hand:

Why take Garrett at #1 if you can have something like Foster, Reddick and Eddie Jackson for the same capital (or less).

Or to use reality: Why keep Chandler Jones if you can have Thuney, Mitchell and Bennett for him.

In any case I love how BB operates within this system . despite quite a lot of misses
(of course it is exactly his modus operandi that allows him more misses, beacuse he creates many more targets for himself)

 

[long distance]

Good post and I tend to agree. However that was early on and I have been able to look more a CBs since then and I did come to the conclusion there are a few I'd take higher up. I agree BB doesn't like to over spend on DE particularly just pass rush specialist and neither do i. If I spend on a first round DE it is someone who can stop the run as well.

However I did both my mock drafts under the beliefs our offense will not need much if anything next year as i see most of the same unit returning. So that leaves fewer spots you look to draft high and i think most of the needs are on defense anyway as i am confident this offense will figure it out.

If Branch comes back DT is a need still but not as much and do we plan to use 3 straight first round picks on DT? I don't think so. LB is a huge need but if we trade Jimmy G i assume Foster doesn't fall in range of that pick (he goes top 4 the more i think about it) and no LB I'd take till 32 at least. I could see the Pats not taking a DE till round 3 but it is just such a need. Sheard gone. Nink old. Long old.

It is possible we see other free agent DEs but as of now the only DE on the roster I have penciled it that i know will be effective is Flowers. It is a very big need in a draft with DE talent.

That is why I have personally looked at these DEs so closely.

Agreed.

If Pats have #12 and Foster falls (it is an outside possibility at the moment) Id be tempted because I love his game and LBs like him can do so much on the field.

But if BB would decide to trade down (plus to next year) Id understand perfectly. Having some 75M (Vollmer retiring, Danny restructuring) in FA gives him a lot of leverage this year if he wants to bolster next year's draft capital with some serious QB, DL etc prospects coming that would be great.

I wouldn't be surprised if he brings in Calais Campbell and one of many solid edge FAs for example. Bringing back Branch for another year would be important but winning tomorrow his motivation could be ?

TE to me will be the most intriguing position in the next weeks. There's nobody behind two elite but very questionable players at least at receiving threat. Not much in FA either. Even if they re-sign Marty to me TE would be a need in draft.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

I don't think @long distance concerns about Garrett are out of place. Garrett has every tool imaginable, but didn't show up much in big games, and only took over games against really low competition.

He is the very clear top pick, but I was hoping to see a bigger step forward this year than what transpired. Part of that was definitely the injury, but he's going to get chopped like that a lot in the pros, and there won't be much grace given anymore.

Sorry man but your way off here imo.

He has 31.5 sacks before 21. He's not putting up thise #'s against all scrubs. Big game and lesser comp comment is just off.

Teams are literally afraid to run at him. Another myth ( hes not good against the run. Nobody in football has the impact he does.

Honestly has anyone actually watched him?


His coach said he was 50-60% during the year. Made McDermitt look silly w/ 5 pressures. When healthy made Robinson look slow and not athletic at all.


If thats the case you must love Barnett? There's a guy who is lined up and puts up #'s against weak comp. Snap jumper like Walker.

People think bc he put up #'s in the sec that it means more?

I have no problem w/ any opinions but they have to back up.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

To conclude my point re situation at hand:

Why take Garrett at #1 if you can have something like Foster, Reddick and Eddie Jackson for the same capital (or less).

Or to use reality: Why keep Chandler Jones if you can have Thuney, Mitchell and Bennett for him.

In any case I love how BB operates within this system . despite quite a lot of misses
(of course it is exactly his modus operandi that allows him more misses, beacuse he creates many more targets for himself)

I fully understand the quantity vs quality approach your eluding to but not in this case.

 

[I.M. Fletcher]

Sorry man but your way off here imo.

He has 31.5 sacks before 21. He's not putting up thise #'s against all scrubs. Big game and lesser comp comment is just off.

Teams are literally afraid to run at him. Another myth ( hes not good against the run. Nobody in football has the impact he does.

Honestly has anyone actually watched him?


His coach said he was 50-60% during the year. Made McDermitt look silly w/ 5 pressures. When healthy made Robinson look slow and not athletic at all.


If thats the case you must love Barnett? There's a guy who is lined up and puts up #'s against weak comp. Snap jumper like Walker.

People think bc he put up #'s in the sec that it means more?

I have no problem w/ any opinions but they have to back up.

Well, I wasn't looking for an argument, but here's some facts.

16 of his 31 sacks happened in 5 games against these teams
Lamar 2 sacks
Rice 2.5
Louisiana-Monroe 3.5
Nevada 3.5
Texas San Antonio 4.5

He had 15 in his other 29 career games.

Games against Top 25 teams

2014 3 games 2 losses 1 sack
2015 2 games 2 losses 1 sack
2016 4 games 2 loses 3 sacks

2 bowl games 2 losses 1 sack


If you want to think that's not the definition of beating up on bad competition, go ahead. He's a tremendous prospect who is going first overall. He also has to be better against good competition.

 

[Peachhead]

I hate to do too much before the combine but just a quick view of my board. It will be in tiers and not ordered.

Top 16 range (assuming we trade Jimmy G)

Personally I'd put OLB Reuben Foster and S Jabrill Peppers in that top 16 list. I think Foster is an almost exact copy of Jerod Mayo. And Peppers, I'm sure BB would find all kinds of cool ways to use his talents. I think he could be one hell of a Safety in Chung's spot.

And I would put DE/OLB Ryan Anderson in the 16-32 list. Now that someone here told me his off-the-field issue was nowhere near as bad as I thought.

 

[BobDigital]

Personally I'd put OLB Reuben Foster and S Jabrill Peppers in that top 16 list. I think Foster is an almost exact copy of Jerod Mayo. And Peppers, I'm sure BB would find all kinds of cool ways to use his talents. I think he could be one hell of a Safety in Chung's spot.

And I would put DE/OLB Ryan Anderson in the 16-32 list. Now that someone here told me his off-the-field issue was nowhere near as bad as I thought.

Foster is my #3 player. I didn't really include him cause i don't think he will be there. Peppers IDK what to think about him yet.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Well, I wasn't looking for an argument, but here's some facts.

16 of his 31 sacks happened in 5 games against these teams
Lamar 2 sacks
Rice 2.5
Louisiana-Monroe 3.5
Nevada 3.5
Texas San Antonio 4.5

He had 15 in his other 29 career games.

Games against Top 25 teams

2014 3 games 2 losses 1 sack
2015 2 games 2 losses 1 sack
2016 4 games 2 loses 3 sacks

2 bowl games 2 losses 1 sack


If you want to think that's not the definition of beating up on bad competition, go ahead. He's a tremendous prospect who is going first overall. He also has to be better against good competition.

It's not like that Fletch. Just diff of opinion I guess n debate.

I think if his coach is close to correct that he was playing around 50% then 15 tfl, 8.5 sacks, 2ff, 1fr looks pretty good.

I see a guy who has 31 sacks by 21. Produces against everyone. There's no one he hasn't beat.

I might like him a lil more which is fine. Everyone has their opinion and you stated your case just fine.

I'd take him w/out doubt and think on this team he would he win us another SB more than trading back for players. In the unlikely event it went down like that.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I have said this before but when I watch Texas a&m games it is hall not garret that pops on film. Unfortunately hall is a bit of a banana and always bruised or dinged.

I absolutely love Humphrey at CB. I doubt he makes it out of the top 15 though.

I also like jones CB of Washington, but I doubt he gets to 25.

Harris, walker, takarritt of ucla or taco will be there at #32. Does bb take one? I don't think so. I think he pulls the trigger on reddick or mccaffrey if he does trade the pick.

 

[manxman2601]

I think if I was picking for the Pats in the top 10 I'd have Jamal Adams and Soloman Thomas at the top of the list. I realise that Chung currently sits in Adams' potential starting roster spot but he'd replace Richards on the roster, would be an awesome special teamer as he learns the defense and would replace Chung as starter after a year learning the defense.