Which players would trade up to 14 to get?

[Deus Irae]

I don't see a scenario that would have made a difference by adding clady......none of the 'L' would would become a 'W' with clady on the roster....unless he could have caught the ball that gaffney dropped or stopped the jets on 3rd and 15

Absolutely. Other than the inability to run block or pass block, nothing would have been improved by having a better offensive line. Being able to run the ball successfully and keep the quarterback upright when passing are both highly overrated aspects of offensive line play. That first-and-goal situation against the Chargers proves that absolutely, I think.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Absolutely. Other than the inability to run block or pass block, nothing would have been improved by having a better offensive line. Being able to run the ball successfully and keep the quarterback upright when passing are both highly overrated aspects of offensive line play. That first-and-goal situation against the Chargers proves that absolutely, I think.

the pats were down 17-3 at the time..........it proves they might have gotten a TD, but it does little to change the end result

 

[Deus Irae]

the pats were down 17-3 at the time..........it proves they might have gotten a TD, but it does little to change the end result

Yes, because the ONLY difference in that game, or any other, would have come on that one set of plays. I wasn't just pointing to an obvious example, I was pinning my entire argument on the only time it would have made any difference.

 

[BradyManny]

I think they need to look at replacing Neal, at the very minimum and, since I think that Kaczur can be moved to guard, I think getting a top echelon tackle when they have the chance is a brilliant move.

A guy who would make sense is Beatty then. He has high upside & will take some time. We have the time to develop an OT - and he fits the system with his athleticism. Mayock is big on him.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Yes, because the ONLY difference in that game, or any other, would have come on that one set of plays. I wasn't just pointing to an obvious example, I was pinning my entire argument on the only time it would have made any difference.

heh.......just like I said, an OT would not have made a difference

 

[Deus Irae]

heh.......just like I said, an OT would not have made a difference

And I disagree, so let's leave it at that.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

And I disagree, so let's leave it at that.

as baseless as you opinion is, I guess I have no choice

 

[Deus Irae]

as baseless as you opinion is, I guess I have no choice

Ahhh... irony.

Biggest "need" positions on the team:

S
ILB
CB

There are no top 14 safeties in most mocks I've seen, ruling that spot out of the question.
I'm not sold on the USC linebackers at this time.
I'm seeing only 1-2 CBs taken in the top 14, leaving others available without trading up.


So, other than you not having a clue, I'm sure you're brilliant.

 

[Water Boy]

This could change based on combine performances, further scouting info, and the Patriots free agency additions, but I would trade up for Everette Brown, Aaron Curry, and possibly Jason Smith.

I like BJ Raji as a player, but I question whether he's what the Patriots are looking for in a 3-4 nose. It seem like he's more of a penetrator, even at his size, than a block eater. I have seen some reports even call him a 3 technique in a 4-3.

I recall a similar scouting report on Wilfork.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Ahhh... irony.

Biggest "need" positions on the team:

S
ILB
CB

There are no top 14 safeties in most mocks I've seen, ruling that spot out of the question.
I'm not sold on the USC linebackers at this time.
I'm seeing only 1-2 CBs taken in the top 14, leaving others available without trading up.


So, other than you not having a clue, I'm sure you're brilliant.

ZING!!!! YOU GOT ME!!!!

like you have a freaking clue......oh that's right......you're the thread queen

so OLB is not a need??? they don't have one that can play who is less than 32 years old, and yet they need an OT when they have 2 who are still sound.......they have 2 ILB's who are 22 and 23 who logged substantial playing time and played well.......but ILB is a bigger need according to you......

aaron curry, malcom jenkins, everette brown, brandon pettigrew are all top 14 guys that would be more useful than any OT .......... which is why I said 'none'

stop acting like you know something and stick to policing threads

 

[Deus Irae]

ZING!!!! YOU GOT ME!!!!

like you have a freaking clue......oh that's right......you're the thread queen

so OLB is not a need??? they don't have one that can play who is less than 32 years old, and yet they need an OT when they have 2 who are still sound.......they have 2 ILB's who are 22 and 23 who logged substantial playing time and played well.......but ILB is a bigger need according to you......

aaron curry, malcom jenkins, everette brown, brandon pettigrew are all top 14 guys that would be more useful than any OT .......... which is why I said 'none'

stop acting like you know something and stick to policing threads

OLB = Vrabel
OLB = Thomas
OLB = Woods
OLB = Crable

ILB = Mayo
ILB = Guyton
ILB = Bruschi

Now, you can opine that Bruschi was not the weak link of the three veteran starters, and you can opine that Guyton showed he's ready to be a 3 down ILB in Bruschi's place. I believe that Bruschi was the weakest of the three, however, and I don't believe that Guyton's ready to be a 3 down player at ILB. That makes ILB more important to fill in this upcoming season, in my opinion.

As for the OT, what part of Neal's turning 33 this October and coming off of two straight seasons with games lost due to injury are you having the most difficulty grasping, and what part of "I think that Kaczur can be moved to guard" is too tough for you to read?

 

[tanked_as_usual]

OLB = Vrabel
OLB = Thomas
OLB = Woods
OLB = Crable

ILB = Mayo
ILB = Guyton
ILB = Bruschi

Now, you can opine that Bruschi was not the weak link of the three veteran starters, and you can opine that Guyton showed he's ready to be a 3 down ILB in Bruschi's place. I believe that Bruschi was the weakest of the three, however, and I don't believe that Guyton's ready to be a 3 down player at ILB. That makes ILB more important to fill in this upcoming season, in my opinion.

As for the OT, what part of Neal's turning 33 this October and coming off of two straight seasons with games lost due to injury are you having the most difficulty grasping, and what part of "I think that Kaczur can be moved to guard" is too tough for you to read?

as for OLB, 3 of the 4 you mentioned could not finish the season........2 of the 4 you mention have not proven to have much value (I know you mentioned that woods played well.......but that''s a laugh) so it leaves you with a 34 year old who has started to show his age and a 32 year old as the only guys who can play........if you mention crable, you may as well mention ruud because he showed about as much......so ILB is not the priority IMO at least not next to OLB where a pass rush was in much worse shape than anything the ILBs were doing.......sufficient depth at ILB can be identified in later rounds (jasper brinkley, for example)

as for OT........ kaczur lacks the mobility and athleticism the pats scheme requires of its OG's so that ends that........the pats would be much better off drafting an OG in the 2nd or 3rd round than drafting an OT in round 1......much smarter value-wise.....the reading is easy, your understanding of what kaczur could do at OG is the tough part

 

[tanked_as_usual]

what's more, woods is not currently under contract .... he will likely be tendered at a lower level, but I don't see him as one long for this team

 

[Deus Irae]

as for OLB, 3 of the 4 you mentioned could not finish the season........2 of the 4 you mention have not proven to have much value (I know you mentioned that woods played well.......but that''s a laugh) so it leaves you with a 34 year old who has started to show his age and a 32 year old as the only guys who can play........if you mention crable, you may as well mention ruud because he showed about as much......so ILB is not the priority IMO at least not next to OLB where a pass rush was in much worse shape than anything the ILBs were doing.......sufficient depth at ILB can be identified in later rounds (jasper brinkley, for example)

Woods is a restricted free agent, not an unrestricted free agent. If he's signed elsewhere before the draft, bring this up again and perhaps I'll change my mind after reviewing what the roster looks like at that time. Until then, I assume he'll be back. And, again, we disagree about the priority.

as for OT........ kaczur lacks the mobility and athleticism the pats scheme requires of its OG's so that ends that........the pats would be much better off drafting an OG in the 2nd or 3rd round than drafting an OT in round 1......much smarter value-wise.....the reading is easy, your understanding of what kaczur could do at OG is the tough part

Shockingly enough, I don't really think you're correct here either, at least when compared to the other non "Neal" right tackles on the team. Also, the idea behind taking a left tackle is that the player will eventually move to.... you know.... left tackle. With the talk that a potentially excellent tackle might slip, I'll keep my preference.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Woods is a restricted free agent, not an unrestricted free agent. If he's signed elsewhere before the draft, bring this up again and perhaps I'll change my mind after reviewing what the roster looks like at that time. Until then, I assume he'll be back. And, again, we disagree about the priority.



Shockingly enough, I don't really think you're correct here either, at least when compared to the other non "Neal" right tackles on the team. Also, the idea behind taking a left tackle is that the player will eventually move to.... you know.... left tackle. With the talk that a potentially excellent tackle might slip, I'll keep my preference.

neither makes sense, but whatever it takes.......

 

[Deus Irae]

neither makes sense, but whatever it takes.......

Of course, the irony being that both make complete sense and you remaining clueless.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Of course, the irony being that both make complete sense and you remaining clueless.

and like I said before.....like YOU have a clue

banking success on pierre woods and kaczur moving to OG..........riiight

like I said, stick to being a thread cop

 

[Deus Irae]

and like I said before.....like YOU have a clue

banking success on pierre woods and kaczur moving to OG..........riiight

like I said, stick to being a thread cop

Who's the oldest starting LB?
Which starting LB has lost more of his game than the others?
Which starting LB came out on passing downs?

The answer to all three is, of course, Bruschi, who happens to be an ILB.

Oh.... but you rate OLB as a higher priority, even though they have one player experienced in the system (Woods) that they can keep if they choose (he's an RFA, not a UFA), and a 3rd rounder who had a season to acclimate and try to build up his body. Now, if the team plans to move Thomas inside, the argument would change. However, until I hear that such a move is the team's intention, I'll stick to the opinion that ILB is a bigger priority.

As for Kaczur, I'm not banking success on him moving to guard. I'm noting that I think he could make the transition if it were needed. I'd prefer Neal to stay healthy and keep the job, but I understand that plans must be made in the event that he gets injured again. Both Light and Kaczur are currently in line to be UFAs after the 2010 season (Kaczur is an RFA after next year, too), so drafting a top flight OT now would give that player 1-2 seasons to work into position before the team has to make a decision on a player who will be a 33 year old left tackle.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I'd only move up for Curry or Malcom Jenkins. Those two players look special and could really improve our D.

 

[Taxed in Maine]

You guys are getting all wound up about this, it seems that this is a black and white issue and noone is looking at the Grey in the middle. But it is the grey area that is the most important.

You have to look at your priorities AND who is available at the best VALUE at that pick.

ILB/OLB - I think ILB is a higher priority than OLB, but, the best value looks to be at OLB early in the draft. There seems to be some real good talent available in that #20-#50 range. OTH, I don't even see an ILB worth drafting until after that #50 spot.

OL - My opinion is that an OG is a higher priority than OT, BUT, is seems that an OT may fall to #23, and be a much higher value pick than an OG.

CB/SS - Again, similar situation. I think SS is the highest priority at this point, but there is no safety worth a 1st rd pick. I really don't think they need another rookie CB at all. But a CB could be the highest value pick at 23. If Alphonso Smith is still on the board, it may be very difficult to pass on him.