Yes, even Mike Reiss can't defend or explain BB's draft reaches

[BritPat]

Right about Collins, he is a pass rusher first. He is athletic and probably could be used in coverage - just not when he's rushing the passer.

Do you consider Hightower and Jones coverage LBs? Because that along with the Big Nickel S/LB position are the roles I suggested David play. The way it would work is Spikes and/or Hightower come off the field in passing situations.

And we still may not have a starting safety in Wilson and Harmon.

We wouldn't have had a starting Linebacker in David either. Unless you think he could have displaced Mayo?

Compare David to Hightower or Collins.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

I'm not sure why you've made that post in reply to my comments, but I'll respond.....

The Pats weren't going to spend a high pick on another Linebacker who was clearly going to only be a situational player. We had the three starters in place, Hightower to join part of the rotation as well, alongside a good-looking coverage LB in Dane Fletcher.

David's had a nice rookie year in a scheme that's pure downhill. He's excellent in coverage, as any WILL should be, but the rest of his game isn't exactly brilliant. Despite having a sturdy D-Line, he was awful when blitzing. As for the run game - well, give me no other responsibility other than shooting a gap created by Gerald McCoy, and I could look like Ray Lewis. When a Guard gets his hands on him though, it's over.

Compare him to Collins who, based on his College tape, you won't have to hide schematically and can, you know, actually rush the passer, then there's no comparison. I see Collins and Hightower as a new Bruschi/Vrabel - players who can play a couple of positions and will help continue our ability to mask our schemes and create confusion.

As for comparing David to TW, that's a false climate you're creating. You can't just say "Player A did more than Player B ergo he would have been the better pick". Nor did Wilson fill the big nickel role, seeing as we seemingly dispensed of that this year and instead went with the likes of Arrington and Cole in a more traditional role.

We needed another young Safety. The Pats looked at him, looked at every other player on their board (including David, who BB personally worked out on campus) and thought he improved the roster the best. That's the bottom line of the whole process. Projecting players to your scheme and what they will add to your organisation. The value of a Safety meant much more than another Linebacker.

As for how Wilson performed - all you need to look at is that he wasn't targeted when he was on the field. Teams weren't going after him (like they did in McCourty's first year, which people forget). That's the measure of any young player.

Moving to Harmon - only time will tell. We only know the facts - he was a core member of a defense that finished 4th in the country last year and was twice voted all-Conference. We also know that none of the amateur GM's out there had him rated higher than 5th-7th round.

But if you want to talk about accurately comparing the players we took to others we didn't then you need to do so by looking at the positions they play and the value they'd have brought. So the comparison you need to make is David v Hightower, not anyone else.

Wilson turned out to be not much more than a situational player, spending a good amount of his playing time playing the coverage LB in nickel and dime packages - a position David is well suited for.

David was still on the board when Wilson was picked and they could both fill the coverage LB role. Hightower was not on the board and is not considered a coverage LB. The comparison is Wilson/David.

If the Pats run a 4-3, having Spikes and Hightower is a little redundant, David would probably be a better fit than Spikes, who is a FA after this year anyway.

 

[Kontradiction]

Kontra -

You keep going on and on about how all the draft pundits seem to be so successful at guessing what round guys should go in and, for that, you hold their opinions in high esteem.

My question to you is this. Does it truly matter what round a guy goes in? If the round a player goes is doesn't matter, then why should it matter where the pundits believe a guy should be drafted?

I'm not going to respond to your other post or any other post directed at me because, honestly, I didn't read it. Wait, hold on...

...but I'll answer this. In regard to your question, I think it matters. On the board, there was a polished pass rusher in Okafor out of Texas that had just turned in a good season and a massive DT out of LSU who, if his lower body holds up (and this team has taken chances on injury prone players before, as we know) could allow us to show some 34 looks while not being a liability against the run. Further, if you ask me, there more than likely would have been a good opportunity to get a McCourty back-up in Harmon later on. They could have also stayed put in the first round and traded back later while snagging Elam.

In all, I'm not disappointed at all in the draft. I actually thought it was very solid. I'm not disappointed in Harmon the player, either. Some people are trying to make it out that way, but I'm not. I'm only disappointed in where he was selected vs. some of the other players that were still on the board that he will no doubt be compared to. A 3rd, IMO, was a little too early for a safety that will be playing in a back-up role.

Now, with that, I'm done. I made my point here and everyone else also made their point, as patfanken earlier said, over and over again.

 

[Nunchucks]

Wilson turned out to be not much more than a situational player, spending a good amount of his playing time playing the coverage LB in nickel and dime packages - a position David is well suited for.

David was still on the board when Wilson was picked and they could both fill the coverage LB role. Hightower was not on the board and is not considered a coverage LB. The comparison is Wilson/David.

If the Pats run a 4-3, having Spikes and Hightower is a little redundant, David would probably be a better fit than Spikes, who is a FA after this year anyway.

David is a weakside outside LB. Spikes is a MLB, their roles are very different. Hightower is playing Strongside LB. You cannot just switch David to sLB and expect him to be successful. It is a very different and more physically challenging position...unless in the nickel, but do you now want a DB to play the nickel spot? you do not want a LB covering a fast TE or slot receiver.

Wilson can play safety, that is way different than Will backer

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm not going to respond to your other post or any other post directed at me because, honestly, I didn't read it. Wait, hold on..

...but I'll answer this. In regard to your question, I think it matters. On the board, there was a polished pass rusher in Okafor out of Texas that had just turned in a good season and a massive DT out of LSU who, if his lower body holds up (and this team has taken chances on injury prone players before, as we know) could allow us to show some 34 looks while not being a liability against the run. Further, if you ask me, there more than likely would have been a good opportunity to get a McCourty back-up in Harmon later on. They could have also stayed put in the first round and traded back later while snagging Elam.

In all, I'm not disappointed at all in the draft. I actually thought it was very solid. I'm not disappointed in Harmon the player, either. Some people are trying to make it out that way, but I'm not. I'm only disappointed in where he was selected vs. some of the other players that were still on the board that he will no doubt be compared to. A 3rd, IMO, was a little too early for a safety that will be playing in a back-up role.

Now, with that, I'm done. I made my point here and everyone else also made their point, as patfanken earlier said, over and over again.

Glad to see that you didn't actually answer the question asked of you. The question had nothing to do with who to take but when they are taken..

Okafor - Not as polished a pass rusher as you'd have people believe. Lacking in coverage skills.

Logan - Not a fit for the Pats 4-3 under or for the 3-4. Also, though he is "stout" in the lower legs, there's no explosion there as seen by his less than stellar Broad Jump and Vertical numbers.

You claim they could have traded back later, but you have no proof of that. You seem to be over-looking that, by trading back, it gave them 3 extra picks and allowed the Pats to get the WRs of their choice instead of having to settle for someone like Da'Rick Rogers.

The whole issue I've had with your assumptions is that they ignore a whole portion of the scouting process that the pundits you hold so dear don't have access to. And that is the interview process. I mean, we're learning now that one of the main reasons that Geno Smith fell to the second round is how he interviewed.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

David is a weakside outside LB. Spikes is a MLB, their roles are very different. Hightower is playing Strongside LB. You cannot just switch David to sLB and expect him to be successful. It is a very different and more physically challenging position...unless in the nickel, but do you now want a DB to play the nickel spot? you do not want a LB covering a fast TE or slot receiver.

Wilson can play safety, that is way different than Will backer

I suggested David play the coverage LB in the nickel and dime packages, something that Wilson played last year. Going forward Mayo, Hightower and David might have worked. I don't know if you can continue to have Spikes and Hightower in the 4-3. Maybe Collins plays LB and maybe one of Wilson or Harmon starts at Safety but they are far from sure things at this point.

David's upside at WLB is seemingly higher than Wilson's at Safety IMO, David could have been used in the coverage LB role Wilson played last year and was considered a potential Safety coming out of the draft. A more productive player from a better program with a somewhat similar skill set. It's who I'll compare the Wilson pick with.

 

[Kontradiction]

Glad to see that you didn't actually answer the question asked of you. The question had nothing to do with who to take but when they are taken..

I answered your question just fine. If you have an issue with it then you were clearly trying to lead me and my answer didn't work for you. Either that, or there was no right answer that I could give, making it a loaded question (not surprising given the amount of logical fallacies taking place in this thread). I answered exactly why I took issue with where Harmon was taken and then included the players that we could have taken.

Okafor - Not as polished a pass rusher as you'd have people believe. Lacking in coverage skills.

He's a very polished pass rusher. Further a DE in the 4-3 doesn't need to be proficient in coverage.

Logan - Not a fit for the Pats 4-3 under or for the 3-4. Also, though he is "stout" in the lower legs, there's no explosion there as seen by his less than stellar Broad Jump and Vertical numbers.

Not who I was talking about.

You claim they could have traded back later, but you have no proof of that.

They could have very easily traded back later with their second round pick. There was also reportedly an offer on the table for 91.

You seem to be over-looking that, by trading back, it gave them 3 extra picks and allowed the Pats to get the WRs of their choice instead of having to settle for someone like Da'Rick Rogers.

One of those WR's was still available in the third round.

The whole issue I've had with your assumptions is that they ignore a whole portion of the scouting process that the pundits you hold so dear don't have access to. And that is the interview process. I mean, we're learning now that one of the main reasons that Geno Smith fell to the second round is how he interviewed.

All we are going on is assumptions. That's why it's been a head scratcher that you're trying to slam me for assuming something when you're doing the same exact thing. The whole thread has boiled down to whose assumption is safer in regard to whether or not he would have been there later on. Here's how it's gone down...

Me: Well, all of these safeties went pretty close to, or after where they were projected. The only exception for a previously rated UDFA was a guy that went in the 6th round.

Others: Yeah but you don't know the scouting process. Maybe another team was ready to reach for Harmon too.

See that? Two different assumtions. One is looking at his class of peers and the way the draft went down vs. where they were projected to go. The other assumes that another team was going to reach up and grab him in the third round as well. Personally, if we're going with two assumptions, I'm generally led to believe that mine is the more informed one because I have actual results to work with when it comes to other players at his position as well as pre-draft projections. The counter arguments in this thread have been weak, at best. This includes your's. It's why the tone of your posts gets decidedly more and more angry with each subsequent response I give you.

In a nutshell, I'm fully aware that I'm assuming. You are not aware that you're doing the same thing. The result is that I'm forming the most logical conclusions I possibly can based off a hypothesis while you're responses are ranging from "you don't know" to "you have no idea". Essentially this debate is the equivalent of a guy that keeps beating the other guy to a pulp and repeatedly tells him not to get back up when he's down.

 

[Ivan]

Wilson turned out to be not much more than a situational player, spending a good amount of his playing time playing the coverage LB in nickel and dime packages - a position David is well suited for.

David was still on the board when Wilson was picked and they could both fill the coverage LB role. Hightower was not on the board and is not considered a coverage LB. The comparison is Wilson/David.

If the Pats run a 4-3, having Spikes and Hightower is a little redundant, David would probably be a better fit than Spikes, who is a FA after this year anyway.

After Hightower LaVonte David was my favorite player in that draft but i still think that Belichick is exhaustive in his scouting and analysis of players and the draft as a whole and even when i want a different player i am going to defer to his judgement because his knowledge of what he is trying to accomplish goes so far beyond any knowledge we have that it is laughable. As fans i think we can adequately say what their needs are in a general sense but to criticize him when he fills those needs but not with the players we want is really ridiculous. Expecting Belichick to not only fill the needs we want but to actually fill them with the specific players we want is really pretty absurd.

 

[Kontradiction]

I work when I am at work. I don't get my coffee and start replying to message boards. I do non-work things on non-work times. To each his own.

That's why you're currently active on a Monday afternoon, right? :bricks:

For one, I work at my own pace. For another, my productivity is amongst the highest in my office, and in my particular department (though it's cute that you care). For a third, it appears that you have a three year old axe to grind still. So I'll save myself another "FU" PM from you, which is where this conversation would no doubt go, and put you back on ignore. Have a nice life.

 

[AzPatsFan]

He had a comparable year to Barron and Smith who were the #1 & #2 safeties. Yet Barron played 99 percent of the defensive snaps, no clue on Smith but it had to be north of 80 percent, both were 16 game starters Wilson only played 42 percent of the snaps and started only 4 games.

Here are the safeties taken after Wilson

Brandon Taylor 3rd #73 SD (the rumor was SD may have been interested in Wilson at #49)
Brandon Hardin 3rd #79 Chicago
Christian Thompson 4th #130 Baltimore
Matt Johnson 4th #135 Dallas
Robert Blanton 5th #139 Minnesota
Corey White 5th #162 New Orleans
George Iloka 5th #167 Cincinnati

Then there was a run on safety in the 6th including Markelle Martin

So going off of 2012 production, Wilson was not a reach as the 3rd safety taken in the draft. This must really tick some people off.

In this draft, the next two picks at Safety were Bacari and Duke. Can you imagine the Draftnik's commentary and reviewing the selection of a 5'8" SHRIMP? Or the acquisition for the captain of the Secondary, being a multi-time, thugish, HOODLUM?

Yeah, right.

I'l take the two time All_BIG EAST Safety who is a leader, with appropriate size and speed. A Safety who can diagnose, lead and is very smart with a 3.8 GPA.

 

[chasa]

In this draft, the next two picks at Safety were Bacari and Duke. Can you imagine the Draftnik's commentary and reviewing the selection of a 5'8" SHRIMP? Or the acquisition for the captain of the Secondary, being a multi-time, thugish, HOODLUM?

Yeah, right.

I'l take the two time All_BIG EAST Safety who is a leader, with appropriate size and speed. A Safety who can diagnose, lead and is very smart with a 3.8 GPA.

get your Logic out of this thread. We don't need intelligence we need blind rage because MKipper said we should have traded Mallet and our 1 to move up and take geno smith in the first.