Young backup LB's

[chunkypony]

See it's funny you say that because that's exactly why I disagree with adding LB's early. With the new CBA, we can sign a guy max 5 years. The whole point of drafting well is to reap the benefits of cheap but contributing talent. It obviously takes at least 3 years for a young LB to learn and master the complexities of what BB demands in this system. Now, as vets have shown, if they have the skills BB believes they do, then they can pick up the scheme relatively quickly in comparison. Now, even this is debatable, as guys like Chad Brown and Monty Beisel really struggled. So, why would you spend a 1st round pick on a LB, who won't be able to do much except ST for his first few years, and then, if he does even ever get it (as picking LB's for any system is as risky as any position), you only get a year or two max of production before you have to spend that same amount of money to retain him?

In other words, isn't it more economical for BB to keep picking DL's, TE's, OL's, and especially DB's in the draft - as he's proven to be able to spot good fits in the system, when these players have proven that more often not they can come in immediately and contribute within their first 2 years. Light, Samuel, Wilson, Watson, Graham, Mankins, Kaczur, Seymour, Wilfork, Warren, Hobbs - basically every day 1 pick at these positions, has contributed immediately as at least a backup or ST player. In fact, the only 2 I can think of are Brock Williams (injured) and Gus Scott (ditto). Even Dave Thomas, buried behind 2 first rounders, was able to help out on ST and made a few nice grabs. Then use the cap savings on these positions to splurge a little more on veteran LB's. I think BB is finding more value with WR's here as well - which is why you see more of a focus recently on FA WR's as opposed to just drafting them.

On a similar note, this is why I expect Samuel to be gone next year. It's not that BB doesn't value him as a player, only that he's not willing to break the bank on a CB when he should be able to spot one who can contribute immediately and do almost as good a job as Asante at a fraction of the cost.

Wow, this is an excellent post. You make a great point, and it makes a lot more sense if you look at it that way.

 

[mgteich]

I must say I don't understand some of the positions taken here. We need six linebackers who can be counted on to contribute this year. In addiiton, we could carry 1-3 linebackers as STers or perhaps a developmental benchwarmer.

We have four linebackers plus Woods and Alexander.
We have Izzo as ST leader and Mays competing for a roster spot.

What we need is NOT rookies. We need a couple of players who can contribute this year. I have suggested adding Hartwell and Seau and perhaps Gardner. I don't any rookie would be much of an upgrade in 2007.To be an upgrade, the player would need to play better ST's than the replaced player.

BTW, I also like the potential of Woods.

MY ROSTER (stronger than last year)
OLB: Colvin, Vrabel, Thomas
ILB: Bruschi, Seau, Hartwell
ST: Izzo, Woods, Gardner/Alexander/Mays

The value on Day One for the pats is NOT in drafting a 2-down linebacker who will compete in two or three years. Rather the value is at CB and S, and perhaps in drafting a tweener like Carriker.

 

[hwc]

Since they were on the team this past year, they would need someone to come in and take their spot, no?

No. They provided crappy linebacker depth on a losing team. If we can upgrade, we upgrade.

The way our linebackers got ***** slapped in the AFC Championship game, I really don't think Belichick plans to stand pat with one new face.

 

[patsox23]

For the uninitiated, Kas's initial post and the thread that has followed, is what patsfans is, at its best - and posts like that used to be ALL OVER this site. Let's hope the last two off-seasons, and the newbies (not all of you) who polluted them, will experience a sea-change, and soon. This thread is a great start. Stepping off my soap-box...

I am more intrigued with the leap that Pierre Woods might make next year than any other roster possibility.

 

[ClevTrev]

I must say I don't understand some of the positions taken here. We need six linebackers who can be counted on to contribute this year. In addiiton, we could carry 1-3 linebackers as STers or perhaps a developmental benchwarmer.

We have four linebackers plus Woods and Alexander.
We have Izzo as ST leader and Mays competing for a roster spot.

What we need is NOT rookies.

The value on Day One for the pats is NOT in drafting a 2-down linebacker who will compete in two or three years. Rather the value is at CB and S, and perhaps in drafting a tweener like Carriker.

OK, good points. Not sure who said it's critical to draft a 2-down linebacker on Day One. However, I'd propose that Woods could be in the mix as an OLB this season.

The point is that Woods, Alexander, and other must be added onto the team to be brought along. Woods was a good value acquisition from last season. My recommendation is to go for more LB value (value = skills + execution potential + draft position/salary). If they find the player who can contribute earlier in the draft meaning that player has a better upside for skills and execution potential with a higher salary, go for it.

I go back to early 2005 once again where Bruschi was injured, Johnson retired, and the plan to work in Beisel and Brown was blown away. The result was a defense out of balance due to the weakness at LB. Creating depth is essential even though the rookies have very little chance of contributing right away. Woods is a year older and a year closer to determining whether he's a true OLB candidate. We need others, ILB/OLB to add to the mix, and the mix is best with a few rookies in development and veteran FAs who can contribute right away.

Agree with you about Seau and would be happy to add him as an ILB to the current squad. Let's hope he sees the opportunity and comes back.

 

[Fencer]

Kas's argument is indeed excellent -- if you draft a guy for only 4-5 years, how many years do you look forward to training him?

TBC seems like a prime example of that, BTW -- if he had been locked up for a few more years, we would probably have gotten vastly more useful LB play out of him.

There's only one thing about that argument that nags at me -- LBs often have rapid impact on OTHER teams. E.g., the DPOY is commonly an LB.

How sure are we that a high draft-pick LB couldn't contribute quickly?

 

[hwc]

TBC seems like a prime example of that, BTW -- if he had been locked up for a few more years, we would probably have gotten vastly more useful LB play out of him.

IMO, the Pats could have resigned Banta-Cain if they had wanted to. As far as I know, they never made him an offer.

That's tells me that Belichick has seen enough and that he intends to aggressively attack the lack of LB depth on the roster. If history is any indicator, A. Thomas won't be the only new face. My guess is that we see two more new linebackers added to the roster, either through free agency or serious draft picks.

Why? Because to avoid another losing season, we have to beat the Chargers and the Colts -- both of whom just gashed our linebackers with tight ends and running backs. We just didn't get many big plays out of linebackers in '06.

 

[kptmorgan04]

GREAT THREAD... Thanks for starting.
I will have to say that I dont know all too much about our young guys except that Alexander started out of no where in the AFCCG, which showed both the need for more help at LB and a possibility of him on the rise. From this discussion it seems that Woods has the most potential and hopefully from that he will get some PT this year.

I do agree that with only 5 years max in the draft that BB prefers to get Vets to start and draft for depth/st. Someone mentioned that other teams have LB's contribute right away. There will always be exceptions with a diamond in the rough, but I would have to say that most of these immideate contributers at LB are not picked after #24 or so which is where we have consistently picked the last few years and when we have picked lower, we havent missed on both talent and need. The complexity of the Defensive System and the extra transistion of the 3-4 makes it an added hurdle for LBs to hop if they were drafted.

I hope Seau comes back, but this year as more of a reserve roll, with Tedy, Jr. and Vrable all rotating inside and Colvin, Thomas, Vrable/Woods rotating outside

 

[Gon_Trevil]

Kas's argument is indeed excellent -- if you draft a guy for only 4-5 years, how many years do you look forward to training him?

TBC seems like a prime example of that, BTW -- if he had been locked up for a few more years, we would probably have gotten vastly more useful LB play out of him.

There's only one thing about that argument that nags at me -- LBs often have rapid impact on OTHER teams. E.g., the DPOY is commonly an LB.

How sure are we that a high draft-pick LB couldn't contribute quickly?

I think you mean Defensive Rookie of the Year, not DPOY. Anyway, like someone else said, the recent LBs that have won the DROY have been very high draft picks, with the exception of DeMeco Ryans (top of 2nd Rd). And the explanation with Ryans is very simple: Decent (not great, or even good) LBs tend to make a LOT of tackles when playing for a horrible defense, due to the amount of plays and long drives the D allows. In the end, their stat sheet looks pretty good, but that doesn't make them any better than a LB who had half the tackles on a D that kept forcing the other teams to 3 and outs.

 

[Fencer]

I think you mean Defensive Rookie of the Year, not DPOY. Anyway, like someone else said, the recent LBs that have won the DROY have been very high draft picks, with the exception of DeMeco Ryans (top of 2nd Rd). And the explanation with Ryans is very simple: Decent (not great, or even good) LBs tend to make a LOT of tackles when playing for a horrible defense, due to the amount of plays and long drives the D allows. In the end, their stat sheet looks pretty good, but that doesn't make them any better than a LB who had half the tackles on a D that kept forcing the other teams to 3 and outs.

Yes, of course, re DROY. Sorry.

But Kendrell Bell's victory as a 2nd round pick wasn't all that long ago.

Nick Barnett also got at least consideration for the award.

And while that's a fair point on the stat-padding -- any guy who wins any kind of ROY award was probably at least a no-apologies competent starter.

 

[mgteich]

Who was the last patriot rookie linebacker who made major contributions as a rookie?

 

[patchick]

We have four linebackers plus Woods and Alexander.
We have Izzo as ST leader and Mays competing for a roster spot.

What we need is NOT rookies. We need a couple of players who can contribute this year. I have suggested adding Hartwell and Seau and perhaps Gardner. I don't any rookie would be much of an upgrade in 2007.To be an upgrade, the player would need to play better ST's than the replaced player.

It seems to me that we need both.

LB is a slow-learning-curve position, so the team has be loath to spend high draft picks on it. Why blow a 1st on a guy who's going to sit on the bench for 2 years? As an individual decision it makes sense, but over time you end up with the situation the Pats faced last season: no developmental pipeline, no depth.

So now we're heading into the season with all four starting LBs over 30. Yes, a couple of vets are desperately needed for security, with Seau a natural choice after learning the position last year. But I'm thinking 2008 with Bruschi likely gone, and 2009 without Colvin. A good-looking rookie or two this year will give the team a lot more options for the future. And given how solid the total starting lineup looks, this draft is all about 2008.

 

[Wotan_the_Wanderer]

Who was the last patriot rookie linebacker who made major contributions as a rookie?

Andy Katzenmoyer!

Seriously though, Teddie Johnson.

 

[cstjohn17]

These are some of the lesser known/discussed players on the roster, but these guys are important as they are probably the closest thing we'll ever see to youth at LB (although I'm sure another late roudn pick or UDFA or two will be added as well).

The are some of the lesser known players because they are pretty far down on the depth charts. I agree with your assessment of the players but need more than hope before I would want to see them in any serious action.

I don't think anyone would be shocked if 1 or more of the 3 did not make the roster in 2007.

Alexander - I am ok with him getting spots snaps (3-7 per game) in coverage situations but see him as the 4th option at ILB (Bruschi, TBD, Vrabel, Alexander).

Woods - Same, if he shows he can do more than STs he may get (4-6) snaps per game. 4th OLB behind Colvin, Thomas, Vrabel.

Mays - Seems to be a career ST if he is to stay on the roster.

There is still a void at ILB, the roster could use one starter and ideally a half decent backup so Vrabel can still take some snaps outside. Seau played great in this role last year but I don't think he can be counted on to stay healthy all year.

 

[ClevTrev]

Who was the last patriot rookie linebacker who made major contributions as a rookie?

mgteich, your point is well taken. The answer: no one in the last 10 years.

Again, the objective is to achieve a mix of contributing veterans and acquire a few rookies over the span of a few drafts to be groomed for contributing as veterans. The team has done it with Bruschi, Johnson, McGinest, and others. It must be done to hedge against injuries and the years when good LB FAs are either too expensive, too rare, or both. It's time to start now.

 

[PatsFan37]

Who was the last patriot rookie linebacker who made major contributions as a rookie?

Who was the last patriot rookie LB drafted in the first day?

Who was the last patriot DL drafted below the first round who made any contribution as a rookie? Imagine if Marquise Hill was the highest DL drafted, what we'd be saying.

You want immediate impact? Draft high.

They haven't done that, they've taken chances filling the pipeline with developmental late-round or UDFA players. Klecko was the highest draftee LB in recent years.

I think this year, that changes.

 

[captain stone]

1) What we need is NOT rookies. We need a couple of players who can contribute this year. I have suggested adding Hartwell and Seau and perhaps Gardner. I don't any rookie would be much of an upgrade in 2007.To be an upgrade, the player would need to play better ST's than the replaced player.

BTW, I also like the potential of Woods.

2) MY ROSTER (stronger than last year)
OLB: Colvin, Vrabel, Thomas
ILB: Bruschi, Seau, Hartwell
ST: Izzo, Woods, Gardner/Alexander/Mays

3) The value on Day One for the pats is NOT in drafting a 2-down linebacker who will compete in two or three years. Rather the value is at CB and S, and perhaps in drafting a tweener like Carriker.

1) What we need is not rookies like Corey Mays; we need rookies with talent and upside, and such rookies are acquired during the draft, possibly as soon as Saturday.
I also have suggested adding Hartwell and Seau, if the prices - and the physical exams - are right.
There is no doubt in my mind that any drafted LB will play better ST than Alexander and Mays. There are also UFA LBs with ST experience, e.g. Keith Adams, Tony Gilbert, Isaiah Kacyvenski...

2) I like your roster. In order to make it better, just replace "Gardner/Alexander/Mays" with 2 rookies and/or 2 of the aforementioned UFA LBs.

3) I would be OK with drafting 2 DBs with #s 24 and 28. Perhaps David Harris, Anthony Waters or Zac Deossie may be available with the 3rd-rounder. BTW, Adam Carriker is a true DE. Anthony Spencer is a tweener to whom I would give serious consideration, were he to be available at 28.

 

[captain stone]

1) No. They provided crappy linebacker depth on a losing team. If we can upgrade, we upgrade.

2) The way our linebackers got ***** slapped in the AFC Championship game, I really don't think Belichick plans to stand pat with one new face.

1) You are correct, sir.

2) I certainly hope that you are correct, sir. Nobody should feel comfortable with Izzo, Alexander and Mays as our only backups at ILB...or on the roster.

 

[captain stone]

1) It seems to me that we need both.

2) LB is a slow-learning-curve position, so the team has be loath to spend high draft picks on it. Why blow a 1st on a guy who's going to sit on the bench for 2 years? As an individual decision it makes sense, but over time you end up with the situation the Pats faced last season: no developmental pipeline, no depth.

3) So now we're heading into the season with all four starting LBs over 30. Yes, a couple of vets are desperately needed for security, with Seau a natural choice after learning the position last year. But I'm thinking 2008 with Bruschi likely gone, and 2009 without Colvin. A good-looking rookie or two this year will give the team a lot more options for the future. And given how solid the total starting lineup looks, this draft is all about 2008.

1) Bingo.

2) Bango.

3) Bongo.

The time to acquire our LBs of the future is now, through both free agency and the draft.

 

[captain stone]

mgteich, your point is well taken. The answer: no one in the last 10 years.

Again, the objective is to achieve a mix of contributing veterans and acquire a few rookies over the span of a few drafts to be groomed for contributing as veterans. The team has done it with Bruschi, Johnson, McGinest, and others. It must be done to hedge against injuries and the years when good LB FAs are either too expensive, too rare, or both. It's time to start now.

You are also correct, sir.