2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6:
    Would we spend our #53 on Spikes?  Before he ran his 40, all of us would have been thrilled to see him on the board at 44.  He doesn't make it to #119 IMO.  Based on the teams interested below if he makes it to 44, he makes it to 53.  Ideally it would be nice to have an early 3rd but we don't. Have to worry about his production declining each year.  Makes you wonder if he was using early on.  But as the story suggests, teams could have been scheming more to stay away from him plus he was injured his senior year.  It could be the groin is still bothering him.  He looked like he was still hurt slipping on at least one of his pro day 40s.  I'm tempted to think 53 for him, that he's still bothered by the groin and by the start of the season, he could be ready to take Guyton's spot. 04/07/2010 - Former Florida middle linebacker Brandon Spikes, who went silent early in two-a-days last August, still isn't talking. Ever the good teammate, Spikes showed up on the practice field Wednesday morning to offer support for the four former Gators going through Pro Day II before about a dozen NFL scouts. Also present was Spikes' agent, Terry Watson, who also represents running back/receiver/kick returner Brandon James, who worked out Wednesday. Given the relaxed setting Wednesday morning, I asked Watson if Spikes would agree to a brief interview about the upcoming draft, thinking this might be a good time. After consulting with Spikes, Watson said his client still would rather not talk. Spikes may not be talking to the media, but Watson said he's been talking to a lot of NFL teams. Watson said Spikes has received a great deal of interest from the Eagles, Redskins, Patriots , Steelers, Dolphins, Browns, Buccaneers and Bills. Spikes' draft stock appeared to slip somewhat when he ran a 4.9 40-yard dash at the first Pro Day on March 17. But Watson said its back up now that teams have been interviewing Spikes and looking at lots of tape of the middle linebacker who made so many plays in his four years at UF. "They say he is an A-plus in terms of linebacker instincts," Watson said. "They're putting a lot into what they're seeing on tape. They're seeing that Brandon is a player, and that's a big thing." - Robbie Andreu, Gator Sports
    Posted by Faucetman


    Not all of us. I never had that much interest in him. I actually predicted he would not run well as it had always been put out there by scouts that they questioned his range.

    I have no idea of the Patriots thoughts on him but I would not take him at #53. Not on this team currently with what they have and what they need.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MordecaiBloodmoon. Show MordecaiBloodmoon's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    If I judge by tape, he is a steal at 53, his 40 times kills me.  I am so torn.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxosoB. Show BosoxosoB's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Here's My Mock:

    First Round:

    #22. Maurkice Pouncey, C/G Florida. The Patriots never do anything glamorous in the first round, unless there is a player that specifically stands out. Therefore, they look to plug holes and build depth, and they do so with Brown. An accompanying move is trading Matt Light to Cleveland for a 6th round pick.

    Second Round:

    #12: Jermaine Gresham, TE Oklahoma
    #15: Brandon Spikes, ILB Florida
    #21: Eric Decker, WR MINN

    Third Round: NO PICK


    Fourth Round: Montario Hardesty, RB Tennessee


    Fifth Round: Navorro Bowman, OLB Penn State

    Sixth Round: Dan LeFevour, QB Central Michigan

    Seventh Round: Crezdon Butler, CB Clemson

    These are my predictions. The early picks fill immediate needs, while the mid-to-later picks are for depth purposes. All picks are not impact players immediately, rather, they are players with potential who could contribute heavily to the success of the team for years to come.



     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Faucet my comments in blue.

    Unless Dan Williams slips to us or we move up to get him within reason I don't see that happening, I don't think there is any way we take a DT in the first two rounds if we are staying in a base 34 defense You might be right but I doubt it would have anything to do with IF we are staying in a 34.  Odrick would be the only that makes sense from a size prospective but he is not the player to replace Seymour; he's not even as good as Warren The idea is not to get a Seymour replica and I wish people would let that go, it is to get a starting caliber DE IF possible.  There is only one player in this draft that replaces Seymour and that's Suh. Again, that's not the question I have.

    Check this out, we have 6 quality DL and as a 34 team Yep quality but not starting quality, 6 is the number you usually carry on your 53 man roster.  Of the 6 who is expendable?  They're all expendable except Wilfork and Warren IF you get someone better, and not Brace because it is to soon and he was a high pick. At NT you have Wilfork and Brace (high 2nd 2009 pick).  At DT you have Warren, Wright, Pryor and Lewis.  I've got to believe all 6 are safe. I disagree. Can you fill me in on if any of those guys were given any recent big guaranteed money.

    If you are looking at who's available earlier in the draft that could beat out our current starters, who would they be?  Let's assume right now our starters are Wright, Wilfork and Warren.  There are no NTs in reach that could be out Wilfork so that rules out Cody and Thomas. Forget Wilfork because even if there are comparable NT's in the draft they just paid big money to a proven guy and that's the bottom line. He just got paid.

    Odrick and Alualu MAY beat out Wright in year 2.  I'll grant that. I disagree. There is not a learning curve, scheme wise, for the defensive front in the 34. So if a player has technique and talent he starts. Pryor started ahead of Wright at times as a rookie. I think Odrick and Alualu take the starting job day one over any of those guys. Cam Thomas would probably push for it as well. My only issue in trying to talk about this is I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA of what the new guy from Carolina brings and can not speak to him. If he's better than Jarvis Green then I agree and say we are all set and not taking anything till later. He's the wild card because I know nothing about him. But to suggest a 1st round pick or a high 2nd that might otherwise be a 1st in other years does not have a high probability of beating out a UDFA backup, or 6th round backup seems a little off base to me.
    Price, Houston, Troup, Joseph, Woods, Atkins, Smith - No way.  Now we are down to the fourth round.  So for me, unless you are adding a likely starter, why draft a player in the first two rounds for depth when you are already have the required positions filled and adequate depth?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

         I've refrained from jumping into a discussion on the draft because it's too early to speculate. Plus, I haven't had the chance to read enough about the players who are available, and about the needs of each respective team. 

         That said, I found this article which may be of interest. It describes how the Patriots use a "short board" when they rank the players that they want to draft. In other words, instead of ranking 300 players, the Pats will weed out the guys that they don't want...and get their board down to a list of 100 players.

         Apparently, BB deciple Josh McDaniels is doing the same thing in Denver: http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14860818
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6:
    If I judge by tape, he is a steal at 53, his 40 times kills me.  I am so torn.
    Posted by MordecaiBloodmoon

    He looked hurt at his pro day on the few clips I saw.  He slipped coming out of his stance, and he looked like he hurt something, could still be the groin or a hammy.  He looked faster on tape.  His instincts are great.  Maybe not at 53 but if he's still around at 100, I'd be tempted to package some late round picks to go get him.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MordecaiBloodmoon. Show MordecaiBloodmoon's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Faucet, if he falls that far and BB and scouts pick him I am thrilled.  If they grab him anywhere else, I am happy becuase they scouted him that high.  If not, I am guessing he didnt reach the proper grade.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6


    I like Spikes, but not with any of the 2nds we currently hold today. I think I would make a play for him by packaging some picks...I would do this if he drops anywhere from 85-100. I just can't see using anything earlier than 53 on him. 

    A lot of folks including myself have eluded to what we can get for certain players on our roster today. I think there is going to be some shuffling, and if some are right, perhaps Light is traded come draft day. I got to think there are enough hungry teams that need a starting LT/RT (and I think Light is still a starter) that would be willing to give up something better than a 4th or 5th rounder?...

    Cleveland to me looks like an interesting trade partner...multiple picks in rounds 2 and 3, many needs, and Holmgren is not afraid to deal. 

    Of the current roster, who do you guys think is on the block and what could we get for them?


     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Faucet my comments in blue.  IQ, Here we go again, my retort in red.

    Unless Dan Williams slips to us or we move up to get him within reason I don't see that happening, I don't think there is any way we take a DT in the first two rounds if we are staying in a base 34 defense You might be right but I doubt it would have anything to do with IF we are staying in a 34.  Odrick would be the only that makes sense from a size prospective but he is not the player to replace Seymour; he's not even as good as Warren The idea is not to get a Seymour replica and I wish people would let that go, it is to get a starting caliber DE IF possibleMy point is there are 2, maybe 3 starting caliber 5 technique DTs in the draft.  Suh (I think we'd all agree), Williams, (I think he can play any of the DL positions although he'd be more valuable as a 3 technique), Alualu (same comments as Williams) and Odrick but I don't think Day 1 he beats out Wright or LewisOf the three who could be in range, Williams beats out everyone on our DL except Wilfork and Warren.  There is only one player in this draft that replaces Seymour and that's Suh. Again, that's not the question I have.  If we are to stay in a 34 and are short a 34 DE, then it is a priority.  If we are switching to 43, that changes our approach at LB too, so it is very germaine to the discussion in what are we looking for.

    Check this out, we have 6 quality DL and as a 34 team Yep quality but not starting quality, I disagree,  Warren, Wilfork and Lewis are all starting quality.  Wright can start in spurts.  Pryor bring a ton of value because he makes nothing.  6 is the number you usually carry on your 53 man roster.  Of the 6 who is expendable?  They're all expendable except Wilfork and Warren IF you get someone better, and not Brace because it is to soon and he was a high pick. If we limit ourselves to 6 DL and we stay in a 34 and we draft a dop DE/DT prospect like Williams or Odrick, then I'd say 1 has to go.  At NT you have Wilfork and Brace (high 2nd 2009 pick).  At DT you have Warren, Wright, Pryor and Lewis.  I've got to believe all 6 are safe. I disagree. Can you fill me in on if any of those guys were given any recent big guaranteed money.  Wright and Lewis, details below.  Being an uncapped year, both could go but I think Lewis could beat out Wright and start.

    April 5, 2009 updateThe Boston Globe's Mike Reiss blogged that "Wright's four-year pact includes base salaries of $620,000 (2009), $1.2 million (2010), $1.24 million (2011) and $1.28 million (2012). He receives a signing bonus of $1.8 million, and a roster bonus of $600,000 that was paid in mid-March. The deal also includes workout bonuses from $80,000-$100,000, depending on the year."

    On April 6th ESPNBoston.Com's Mike Reiss blogged that "the free-agent contract signed by veteran defensive lineman Damione Lewis with the Patriots is a one-year deal. Lewis will earn a base salary of $1.15 million. "

    I agree Brace will be given another year and as I said, Pryor has great value earning just $395,000.

    If you are looking at who's available earlier in the draft that could beat out our current starters, who would they be?  Let's assume right now our starters are Wright, Wilfork and Warren.  There are no NTs in reach that could be out Wilfork so that rules out Cody and Thomas. Forget Wilfork because even if there are comparable NT's in the draft they just paid big money to a proven guy and that's the bottom line. He just got paid.

    Odrick and Alualu MAY beat out Wright in year 2.  I'll grant that. I disagree. There is not a learning curve, scheme wise, for the defensive front in the 34. You're kidding, right?  We run various stunts, line up over the place, even drop a guy back into coverage.  Besides DL assignments, our players have to know what everyone else's roles are on a given play.  That's why we look for smart players.  So if a player has technique and talent he starts. Pryor started ahead of Wright at times as a rookie. I think Odrick and Alualu take the starting job day one over any of those guys. Possibly, I'd say not day 1.  You have to learn our system, very few defensive players have come right in and started day 1 for us.  Cam Thomas would probably push for it as well. My only issue in trying to talk about this is I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA of what the new guy from Carolina brings and can not speak to him. He's solid, ten year starter as a 3 technique, can penetrate.  Lewis, Wright and Pryor are in a 3 man competition to start right now in Seymour's old spot. If he's better than Jarvis Green (he's a different player.  He's a 43 DT) then I agree and say we are all set and not taking anything till later. He's the wild card because I know nothing about him. But to suggest a 1st round pick or a high 2nd that might otherwise be a 1st in other years does not have a high probability of beating out a UDFA backup, or 6th round backup seems a little off base to me. It isn't about where you were drafted, it is was Kevin O'Connell would have beat out Brady.  Common, you know better than that.  It's about how good you are now.  Brace was a high second and he wasn't beating out the water boy last year.  My comments are based on the guys we have who know the system, have been given extensions (WRIGHT), have started and performed have an edge heading into camp over Odrick, Alualu, or Thomas.  Williams I think is just so much better than those that I think if we got him, he will from Day 1 show he's the man!!
    Price, Houston, Troup, Joseph, Woods, Atkins, Smith - No way.  Now we are down to the fourth round.  So for me, unless you are adding a likely starter, why draft a player in the first two rounds for depth when you are already have the required positions filled and adequate depth?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Faucet--I have friends in the LA (just average fans) area who watched Mays quite a bit.  They say he is lazy and takes plays off and doesn't work to his potential.  Best I worry about.  I saw the hit and it was staggering.  I worry about his size.  I know he has tools, but I would really like us to get a big, bruising, ground control type back.  And I am completely with you on the "he-whom-we-will-no-longer-mention" pick--I don't think they should (until later rounds) but I wouldn't be shocked.  Where did you live in Maine?  I grew up in Bar Harbor/Ellsworth area and now live in Harrison in the summers (Bridgton/Norway/Casco/Sebago area.)
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6:
    Faucet--I have friends in the LA (just average fans) area who watched Mays quite a bit.  They say he is lazy and takes plays off and doesn't work to his potential.  Best I worry about.  I saw the hit and it was staggering.  I worry about his size.  I know he has tools, but I would really like us to get a big, bruising, ground control type back.  And I am completely with you on the "he-whom-we-will-no-longer-mention" pick--I don't think they should (until later rounds) but I wouldn't be shocked.  Where did you live in Maine?  I grew up in Bar Harbor/Ellsworth area and now live in Harrison in the summers (Bridgton/Norway/Casco/Sebago area.)
    Posted by Critter23


    Grew up in the Farmington, ME area, if you know where that is, north of Augusta and Lewiston on the way to Sugar loaf.  I know your area well, graduated from Maine Maritime and I owned some lakefront property on Toddy Pond.  After getting married, I moved to Biddeford lived there and NH for awhile before moving to Orange County, CA 10 years ago.

    I've seen a lot of Mays since USC is on all the time out here.  Mays can hit but I don't think I'd take him at 22 and he won't last to 44 so I don't talk too much about him.  The funny thing is if he came out last year he would have been a top 10, maybe 5 pick based on his Sophomore season since his production was down.  It will be interesting if the man who knows he best, Pete Carroll takes him with one of his two picks and he needs S help.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Faucet: Went to Toddy Pond a few times when I was a kid.  As a teacher in the Norway area, took my varsity softball team to Mt. Blue--in Farmington, right?  I have a friend named Roger Foster in Harrison; I think he grew up in Farmington too.

    OK, back to the draft.  Am I making this up--it seems like there will be nobody we're really sold on at 22 unless we get Graham; no matter who is brought up, it seems like there are reservations.  So is a trade up or down pretty much a sure thing here?  Pouncy seems like solid value but it doesn't seem like he fills "a big need." 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Faucet my comments in blue.  IQ, Here we go again, my retort in red.

    Unless Dan Williams slips to us or we move up to get him within reason I don't see that happening, I don't think there is any way we take a DT in the first two rounds if we are staying in a base 34 defense You might be right but I doubt it would have anything to do with IF we are staying in a 34.  Odrick would be the only that makes sense from a size prospective but he is not the player to replace Seymour; he's not even as good as Warren The idea is not to get a Seymour replica and I wish people would let that go, it is to get a starting caliber DE IF possible.  My point is there are 2, maybe 3 starting caliber 5 technique DTs in the draft.  Suh (I think we'd all agree), Williams, (I think he can play any of the DL positions although he'd be more valuable as a 3 technique), Alualu (same comments as Williams) and Odrick but I don't think Day 1 he beats out Wright or Lewis.  As I said I can't speak to Lewis because I know nothing about him other than he was drafted in the 1st round and has ONLY had 3 seasons where he saw significant starting time. He might be nothing more than cheap competition for all we know. I have absolutely no doubt however that Odrick , Alualu and possibly Cam Thomas could beat out Wright as a starter against the run. Wrights value has always been as a situational pass rusher. He's just so-so against the run at best. I'm saying this as a Wright fan. He's a hard nose always give it his all player, the kind you want on your team but facts are facts and emotions won't get in the way of saying what he can and can't do well. I also think that it would be a huge mis-evaluation on a player like Odrick being drafted between 22 and 32 if he would not be expected to start if not day one then soon after the season started. If the Pats had an established guy in that spot then yeah he maybe not but unless Lewis becomes that guy then there's a starting opening. While there are not a lot of DT/DE types taken each year in the 22-32 range to compare to, some of the ones that have come in have started. Ex.
    2009
    jerry peria

    2008
    Lawrence Jackson

    2005
    Luis Castillo
    Of the three who could be in range, Williams beats out everyone on our DL except Wilfork and Warren.  There is only one player in this draft that replaces Seymour and that's Suh. Again, that's not the question I have.  If we are to stay in a 34 and are short a 34 DE, then it is a priority.  If we are switching to 43, that changes our approach at LB too, so it is very germaine to the discussion in what are we looking for. Yeah I really will be shocked if they switched. I have heard BB far too many times speak of his overwhelming preference for the 34 but anything is possible if he thinks he can't get the talent to run it effectively.

    Check this out, we have 6 quality DL and as a 34 team Yep quality but not starting qualityI disagree,  Warren, Wilfork and Lewis are all starting quality.  Wright can start in spurts.  Starting because of and injury or to be a situational player is not what I consider a true starter. Pryor bring a ton of value because he makes nothing. We're not talking about value here. I am not disagreeing about value but that's not the discussion. 6 is the number you usually carry on your 53 man roster.  Of the 6 who is expendable?  They're all expendable except Wilfork and Warren IF you get someone better, and not Brace because it is to soon and he was a high pick. If we limit ourselves to 6 DL and we stay in a 34 and we draft a dop DE/DT prospect like Williams or Odrick, then I'd say 1 has to go.  Without knowing how Lewis will play in a 34, his age, he didn't get signed for big money, etc. He could end up going. At NT you have Wilfork and Brace (high 2nd 2009 pick).  At DT you have Warren, Wright, Pryor and Lewis.  I've got to believe all 6 are safe. I disagree. Can you fill me in on if any of those guys were given any recent big guaranteed money.  Wright and Lewis, details below.  Being an uncapped year, both could go but I think Lewis could beat out Wright and start. Don't know, Lewis, Wright and Pryor all seem similar to me.

    April 5, 2009 updateThe Boston Globe's Mike Reiss blogged that "Wright's four-year pact includes base salaries of $620,000 (2009), $1.2 million (2010), $1.24 million (2011) and $1.28 million (2012). He receives a signing bonus of $1.8 million, and a roster bonus of $600,000 that was paid in mid-March. The deal also includes workout bonuses from $80,000-$100,000, depending on the year." 

    On April 6th ESPNBoston.Com's Mike Reiss blogged that "the free-agent contract signed by veteran defensive lineman Damione Lewis with the Patriots is a one-year deal. Lewis will earn a base salary of $1.15 million. " Any signing bonus or guarantees? That salary must be close to vet minimum no?

    I agree Brace will be given another year and as I said, Pryor has great value earning just $395,000.

    If you are looking at who's available earlier in the draft that could beat out our current starters, who would they be?  Let's assume right now our starters are Wright, Wilfork and Warren.  There are no NTs in reach that could be out Wilfork so that rules out Cody and Thomas. Forget Wilfork because even if there are comparable NT's in the draft they just paid big money to a proven guy and that's the bottom line. He just got paid.

    Odrick and Alualu MAY beat out Wright in year 2.  I'll grant that. I disagree.There is not a learning curve, scheme wise, for the defensive front in the 34.You're kidding, right?  Well no I am not kidding at all. Two reasons. First how many times do you see in a game where the front 3 do any stunting what so ever with regards to the DE crashing down towards the nose and VW looping out and around the DE? Come on they are not an attacking type defense. They are a read and react and anchor down hold the point of attack defense in the front 3. Second there have been countless times in interviews where Seymour when here, Wilfork, Warren etc, have been asked during the early parts of their careers if the defense was hard to pick up and learn. To a man they all always say no our job is easy and there is not much to the NT and DE position in this 34. All the hard stuff falls on the linebackers and DB's. I am paraphrasing of course but if you wish to find some transcripts I am sure you can. They would know better than I so I take their word for it. We run various stunts, line up over the place, even drop a guy back into coverage.  Besides DL assignments, our players have to know what everyone else's roles are on a given play.  That's why we look for smart players.  So if a player has technique and talent he starts. Pryor started ahead of Wright at times as a rookie. I think Odrick and Alualu take the starting job day one over any of those guys. Possibly, I'd say not day 1. Yes, no guarantee but high probability unless you whiff on the draft pick which is always possible. You have to learn our system, very few defensive players have come right in and started day 1 for us.  Cam Thomas would probably push for it as well. My only issue in trying to talk about this is I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA of what the new guy from Carolina brings and can not speak to him. He's solid, ten year starter as a 3 technique, can penetrate.  Lewis, Wright and Pryor are in a 3 man competition to start right now in Seymour's old spot. If he's better than Jarvis Green (he's a different player.  He's a 43 DT yeah that's what Jarvis Green was more considered, so how is that different? 43 DT types in a 34 end up being situational pass rushers) then I agree and say we are all set and not taking anything till later. He's the wild card because I know nothing about him. But to suggest a 1st round pick or a high 2nd that might otherwise be a 1st in other years does not have a high probability of beating out a UDFA backup, or 6th round backup seems a little off base to me. It isn't about where you were drafted, it is was Kevin O'Connell would have beat out Brady. I said "Probability". There are always exceptions and draft Whiff's but if you hit on your pick in the 1st round yeah there IS a high probability that player is going to be starting for you sooner than later. Common, you know better than that.  It's about how good you are now.  Brace was a high second and he wasn't beating out the water boy last year.  My comments are based on the guys we have who know the system, have been given extensions (WRIGHT) Yeah well I guess I need to know how the extension affects the salary. Sometimes they give these guys extensions to push money further out and eliminate a upcoming high salary year or to simply change the contract wording in some way to make it easier at a later time to move on from that player. There are always other considerations. They extended Kaczur and LaVoir too but you all think they are looking for a OT., have started and performed have an edge heading into camp over Odrick, Alualu, or Thomas.  Williams I think is just so much better than those that I think if we got him, he will from Day 1 show he's the man!!

    Bottom line for me. Lewis was easily had for short money and only has had 3 years where he started a significant amount of time. He also does not know the system at all if that matters. To me not really for the front 3. Wright and Pryor I would not consider full time starters right now. Wright's been here long enough to prove he's a pretty good pass rusher but avg at best holding the point of attack. Pryor too young to pigeon hole.

    Where did the Ravens relentlessly run over in the Playoff game? Right over that DE spot in question. The Patriots tried just about everyone there prior to eventually moving Wilfork there in desperation. If that doesn't scream out "Hole" I don't know what does.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Pro Football Focus is doing a new analysis on the best pass blocking teams in the NFL. So far they have listed 32 up through the 13th ranked and the Patriots have not yet been listed. The Chargers were actually listed as the 21st best which makes what Phillip Rivers has been doing even that much more impressive.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Does anyone know the Sergio Kindle story? I thought I saw someone say he was stuck behind Orakpo but he had 10 sacks in 2008. As a sub? Did he play another position? Did he play on the opposite side of Orakpo and benefit from the attention given to Orakpo?

    His sack numbers went down from 10 to 6 in 2009 but his tackles went up from 46 to 55.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6:
         I've refrained from jumping into a discussion on the draft because it's too early to speculate. Plus, I haven't had the chance to read enough about the players who are available, and about the needs of each respective team.       That said, I found this article which may be of interest. It describes how the Patriots use a "short board" when they rank the players that they want to draft. In other words, instead of ranking 300 players, the Pats will weed out the guys that they don't want...and get their board down to a list of 100 players.      Apparently, BB deciple Josh McDaniels is doing the same thing in Denver: http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14860818
    Posted by TexasPat3


    To early to speculate? The draft is less than two weeks away.

    I read the article this morning, very interesting. The pats only had 25 players on there entire board one year. Imagine being a scout and turning in your analysis for your area and Belichek goes "nah I don't think we're going to put any of these guys on our board, thanks anyways".

    It's funny, we're all trying to speculate who they are going to take and he probably doesn't have half these guys even on their board. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6:
    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6 : To early to speculate? The draft is less than two weeks away. I read the article this morning, very interesting. The pats only had 25 players on there entire board one year. Imagine being a scout and turning in your analysis for your area and Belichek goes "nah I don't think we're going to put any of these guys on our board, thanks anyways". It's funny, we're all trying to speculate who they are going to take and he probably doesn't have half these guys even on their board. 
    Posted by mthurl


    Uncharacteristically the Patriots Organization came out with an official tweet disputing that 25 player board comment as complete fiction.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    There are suppose to be 14 teams running the 34 Defense this season and I am attempting to list them in order of when they are drafting in the first round. This is what I have so far. Am I correct? Are they the correct teams?

    Redskins
    Chiefs
    Browns
    Bills
    Broncos
    Dolphins
    49ers
    Steelers
    Patriots
    Packers
    Ravens
    Cowboys
    Chargers
    Jets
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    IQ,

    After a couple of iterations this becomes too verbose and we just go around and around.  We have drafted (Pryor) and signed (Lewis), and resigned (Wright) all of whom I consider 43 DTs.  Brace was drafted to be a true back-up to Wilfork and to provide security should Wilfork hold-out (which was a concern at draft time last year). Warren is a sure fire 34 DE.  Prior to drafting Brace, Wright backed up at nose.  Wright is still 2nd on the depth chart at nose ahead of Brace on the Pats unofficial depth chart.  My point is, we have too many 43 DTs (3) and not enough 34 DEs (1). 

    The good news is, Odrick projects to me as a 34 DE.  Of the top DT talent in the draft, other than Suh, Odrick is the only one that makes sense to draft as a 34 DE.  I know Alualu played 34 DE at Cal and yes one could argue that he can stay there in the pros but he is better suited to play inside as a 43 DT.  The same could be said of Joseph. 

    Okay, so take Odrick and problem solved, right?  I'm not so sure.  The problem for me is Odrick isn't even as good as Warren.  You argue that he has to just be good enough to start and be better than the other options on our roster.  I disagree.  That's not good enough to spend your top pick on.  One of our 34 DEs needs to be dominent IMO.  You have 5 OLs and at times a TE going up against 2 so-so DEs and a stud NT.  Even a bad team can use a C and OG to double VW then go man-to-man on Warren and Odrick.

    But the key to a 34 Defense are your outside LBs.  Assuming Thomas will be gone, we have TBC, Crable, Woods, Ninkovich and Murrell.  Those names are not giving me a warm fuzzy feeling right now as none of them are dominant either.  TBC is a decent pass rusher but he's a liability in coverage and average at best against the run.  The others aren't even worth talking about until they've done something.  It could be argued we need two new OLBs. 

    So, we have a lot of problems to solve if we are to build a dominant 34 defense again.   There is no way any combination of TBC and Crable/Woods or the others is better than Colvin and Vrabel or Colvin and McGinest.  Thomas was okay when we had Seymour, once Seymour left Thomas couldn't do anything over there on the weak side.

    But today, we can field a pretty good 43 DL.  We have TBC as a 43 pass rushing DE.  I'd also argue we have adequate LBs, the kind you want (fast, athletic, that can run side line to side line) to play the 43.  The only missing piece is landing a better pass rusher like Graham.  There are plenty of 43 DTs in this draft to add for depth.

    To fix our 34 defense, we need a stud 34 DE and a stud weak side OLB.  Assuming no trading down, to get Odrick, we'd have to use #22.  AND HE'S NOT A STUD 34 DE.  At best he'll be pedistrian.  Then where will we get our stud OLB?  Kindle, Hughes, and Graham will be long gone by 44.  There is an outside chance Sapp will be there and Misi should be there at 48 or 53.  Assuming that Sapp and/or Misi solve the problem we just spent 2 of our 4 premium picks on a 34 DE that is not as good as Warren, let alone Seymore and on a conversion guy OLB (Misi) or a guy recovering from an ACL (Sapp).  I don't know, seems to me a bit risky making two moves like this to try to fix the 34.

    I'd be more inclined to play a bit more 43 where I have the DL and LB talent to play it today at a high level and I certainly have adequate DBs to play the nickel.  I would then wait until 2011 where I have two 1sts to find Seymour's replacement.  If I really wanted to improve the front 7, I'd package 22 and 53 and move up to take Williams.  This gives you a 34 DL of Williams, Wilfork and Warren OR a 43 DL of TBC, Williams, Lewis and Warren.  Either combination would be very stout to run against and should be able to apply some pressure without blitzing.  At LB I'd go with Guyton, Mayo and McKenzie, all fast guys.  Now with two picks you've actually added QUALITY and not just plugging holes with average players.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6:
    IQ, After a couple of iterations this becomes too verbose and we just go around and around.  We have drafted (Pryor) and signed (Lewis), and resigned (Wright) all of whom I consider 43 DTs.  Brace was drafted to be a true back-up to Wilfork and to provide security should Wilfork hold-out (which was a concern at draft time last year). Warren is a sure fire 34 DE.  Prior to drafting Brace, Wright backed up at nose.  Wright is still 2nd on the depth chart at nose ahead of Brace on the Pats unofficial depth chart.  My point is, we have too many 43 DTs (3) and not enough 34 DEs (1).  The good news is, Odrick projects to me as a 34 DE.  Of the top DT talent in the draft, other than Suh, Odrick is the only one that makes sense to draft as a 34 DE.  I know Alualu played 34 DE at Cal and yes one could argue that he can stay there in the pros but he is better suited to play inside as a 43 DT.  The same could be said of Joseph.  Okay, so take Odrick and problem solved, right?  I'm not so sure.  The problem for me is Odrick isn't even as good as Warren.  You argue that he has to just be good enough to start and be better than the other options on our roster.  I disagree.  That's not good enough to spend your top pick on.  One of our 34 DEs needs to be dominent IMO.  You have 5 OLs and at times a TE going up against 2 so-so DEs and a stud NT.  Even a bad team can use a C and OG to double VW then go man-to-man on Warren and Odrick. But the key to a 34 Defense are your outside LBs.  Assuming Thomas will be gone, we have TBC, Crable, Woods, Ninkovich and Murrell.  Those names are not giving me a warm fuzzy feeling right now as none of them are dominant either.  TBC is a decent pass rusher but he's a liability in coverage and average at best against the run.  The others aren't even worth talking about until they've done something.  It could be argued we need two new OLBs.  So, we have a lot of problems to solve if we are to build a dominant 34 defense again.   There is no way any combination of TBC and Crable/Woods or the others is better than Colvin and Vrabel or Colvin and McGinest.  Thomas was okay when we had Seymour, once Seymour left Thomas couldn't do anything over there on the weak side. But today, we can field a pretty good 43 DL.  We have TBC as a 43 pass rushing DE.  I'd also argue we have adequate LBs, the kind you want (fast, athletic, that can run side line to side line) to play the 43.  The only missing piece is landing a better pass rusher like Graham.  There are plenty of 43 DTs in this draft to add for depth. To fix our 34 defense, we need a stud 34 DE and a stud weak side OLB.  Assuming no trading down, to get Odrick, we'd have to use #22.  AND HE'S NOT A STUD 34 DE.  At best he'll be pedistrian.  Then where will we get our stud OLB?  Kindle, Hughes, and Graham will be long gone by 44.  There is an outside chance Sapp will be there and Misi should be there at 48 or 53.  Assuming that Sapp and/or Misi solve the problem we just spent 2 of our 4 premium picks on a 34 DE that is not as good as Warren, let alone Seymore and on a conversion guy OLB (Misi) or a guy recovering from an ACL (Sapp).  I don't know, seems to me a bit risky making two moves like this to try to fix the 34. I'd be more inclined to play a bit more 43 where I have the DL and LB talent to play it today at a high level and I certainly have adequate DBs to play the nickel.  I would then wait until 2011 where I have two 1sts to find Seymour's replacement.  If I really wanted to improve the front 7, I'd package 22 and 53 and move up to take Williams.  This gives you a 34 DL of Williams, Wilfork and Warren OR a 43 DL of TBC, Williams, Lewis and Warren.  Either combination would be very stout to run against and should be able to apply some pressure without blitzing.  At LB I'd go with Guyton, Mayo and McKenzie, all fast guys.  Now with two picks you've actually added QUALITY and not just plugging holes with average players.
    Posted by Faucetman

    I'm with you that a change to a 43 could be in the making and that we are missing too many pieces to operate successfuly in the 34. Only problem I have with drafting graham if we are moving to the 43 is that now you have Tully at 6-1 on one side and graham at six feet on the other. No way that is going to happen in a 43. 

    The problem with this draft and many others is that true 43 defensive ends are hard to find. Alot of these college ends are 6'3" to 6'4" and weigh 240. It seems like less and less teams have those 6'5" 285 guys that can really pressure the edge and hold up in run support. Derrick Morgan looks like a true 43 end to me and even he is not as big as he was origanaly listed, his height went from 6'5" to 6'3" at the combine. It's funny how alot of these players shrink when they are measured.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from MordecaiBloodmoon. Show MordecaiBloodmoon's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Graham could play 4-3 end, but I dont see us changing, the 3-4 is BBs baby.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6:
    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6 : Uncharacteristically the Patriots Organization came out with an official tweet disputing that 25 player board comment as complete fiction.
    Posted by Low-FB-IQ


    Thought 25 was a bit low. Can't believe the patriots actually responded to something, this must have really rufulled some feathers. I'm really getting sick of the web sight I got this from, Pro Football Talk, it used to be a site that had it's finger on the pulse of the nfl, now there breaking news is something that someone else reported about 3 days ago. But 8 years ago it made for some very good and sometime acurate reading.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    In Response to Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6:
    Graham could play 4-3 end, but I dont see us changing, the 3-4 is BBs baby.
    Posted by MordecaiBloodmoon


    Don't be too sure, he played the 43 in cleveland if I remember. But you're right, Graham could probably play in any defense, problem is, do you want two guys under six two for your ends in a 43?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

     AND HE'S NOT A STUD 34 DE.  At best he'll be pedistrian.

    I am not even in favor of drafting him per se, but I think that is a bit unfair. I get what you are saying, that he isn't the most exciting 34 prospect . . . he isn't the flashiest, but he does have good upside as a pass rusher and run stopper. He wouldn't be a 1st round prospect if people thought his ceiling was 'pedestrian.'

    Will he be the force that Sey was? Likely not, he is a HOFer, first ballot. But I could see this kid being like Warren with a little better ability to get after the QB. Which wouldn't make me lose any sleep  for #22 overall.

    I think the problem with strong side OLB can't be understated. That is a role a player has to grow into in the NE defense.

    All in all, I still think adding a player like Graham or Kindle would be better than Odrick tho, simply because NE is really thin at OLB and getting old. And either of these cats could play 43 on 3rd down or 34 on the first two downs with some training. 

    I think in the end, the #1 need NE has to get taken care of is pass rush. After that, OL, then WR and TE.

    The case you are stating stays in line with that . .  Odrick (oddly enough) almost comes off as a luxury pick when you have Pryor, Wright, Warren, Brace, and Fork. 

    But when you have TBC and a disgruntled, aging Thomas, then a bunch of scrap pieces like Woods, Crable, et al, it is a lot more worriesome.

    FWIW, I think highly of this year's OLB/De spects, and I think *either* Graham or Kindle would really transform this defense next season.   


     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: 2010 Mock Rounds 1-6

    Faucet I hear you about the verbose...

    Okay, so take Odrick and problem solved, right?  I'm not so sure.  The problem for me is Odrick isn't even as good as Warren.  I have no idea if that is true or not. I have my doubts because Odrick ends up on the ground too much but it's only when he's trying to shoot through or go around uncontrolled. He never ends up on the ground anchoring against double teams. I am not saying Odrick is absolutely the guy. I am saying we absolutely have a problem. You argue that he has to just be good enough to start and be better than the other options on our roster. Well by being of starting quality he is better than the others on the roster, I think that would be logically obvious. I disagree.  That's not good enough to spend your top pick on.  It's late in the 1st round. A starter is good enough for a later 1st round pick. That's what Maroney, Meriweather, Watson, etc were. Starters, not HOFers. One of our 34 DEs needs to be dominent IMO.  Well unless you hit a homerun by accident or go after a high profile FA one year and pay thorugh the nose you will NEVER have one again. I don't ever want the Patriots picking that high again, hopefully, unless we have a nice accidental trade that gets us there because otherwise it means the Patriots stink like they did when they had all those high picks.You have 5 OLs and at times a TE going up against 2 so-so DEs Warren is not so-so he's one of the best DE in the game and was the only DL out of Seymour AND Wilfork and himself to get extended early and without incident by the Team. and a stud NT.  Even a bad team can use a C and OG to double VW then go man-to-man on Warren and Odrick. I don't think so. Watch some of the Pats games again and some of the senior bowl practices and the senior bowl game. You are not easily handling Warren and Odrick One-on-One. In the clips I've watched, players like Graham are having a nice day because they are one-on-one because Williams, Odrick and Cam Thomas are constantly double and triple teamed.

    But the key to a 34 Defense are your outside LBs.  Assuming Thomas will be gone, we have TBC, Crable, Woods, Ninkovich and Murrell.  Those names are not giving me a warm fuzzy feeling right now as none of them are dominant either.  TBC is a decent pass rusher but he's a liability in coverage and average at best against the run.  The others aren't even worth talking about until they've done something.  It could be argued we need two new OLBs.  Agreed!

    So, we have a lot of problems to solve if we are to build a dominant 34 defense again.   There is no way any combination of TBC and Crable/Woods or the others is better than Colvin and Vrabel or Colvin and McGinest.  Thomas was okay when we had Seymour, once Seymour left Thomas couldn't do anything over there on the weak side. Agreed! They need to hit on someone or two in the draft or at least hope Crable can stay healthy AND play well.


    To fix our 34 defense, we need a stud 34 DE and a stud weak side OLB.  Assuming no trading down, to get Odrick, we'd have to use #22.  AND HE'S NOT A STUD 34 DE.  What do you mean by stud? Elite? You aren't getting one unless by accident or picking in the top 5 and still might not get one. Chiefs took one last year in the top 5 and he's not played Elite so far. What do you do throw out the 34 because you might never get another Richard Seymour? Isn't that throwing out the bath water to spite the baby? Or however the saying goes. At best he'll be pedistrian. I don't know what he is but I will go as far as to say he's much better than pedestrian. Then where will we get our stud OLB?  Kindle, Hughes, and Graham will be long gone by 44. Who says you have to stay at #44? There is an outside chance Sapp will be there and Misi should be there at 48 or 53.  Assuming that Sapp and/or Misi solve the problem we just spent 2 of our 4 premium picks on a 34 DE that is not as good as Warren, let alone Seymore Yeah so what? Neither of those picks you used were nearly as high as Seymour at #5 and Warren at #13, what matters is did you improve your team and fill some glaring needs to make those improvements. and on a conversion guy OLB (Misi) or a guy recovering from an ACL (Sapp).  I don't know, seems to me a bit risky making two moves like this to try to fix the 34.

    I'd be more inclined to play a bit more 43 where I have the DL and LB talent to play it today at a high level and I certainly have adequate DBs to play the nickel.  I would then wait until 2011 where I have two 1sts to find Seymour's replacement.  If I really wanted to improve the front 7, I'd package 22 and 53 and move up to take Williams.  This gives you a 34 DL of Williams, Wilfork and Warren OR a 43 DL of TBC, Williams, Lewis and Warren.  Either combination would be very stout to run against and should be able to apply some pressure without blitzing.  At LB I'd go with Guyton, Mayo and McKenzie, all fast guys.  Now with two picks you've actually added QUALITY and not just plugging holes with average players.

    I have no comments on any of the 43 stuff simply because I have not thought about it other than to say I agree it is easier to find players for that system. I think there is a reason 14 teams are going to be using the 34 this season however.

    On Williams, I have no more inclination about Williams ability to play DE in a 34 than I do about how good or bad Odrick will be as a player. Williams more stout against the run but no ability other than bull rush to get after the QB. He reminds me of Warren in that regard. Odrick is very dangerous One-on-One but he basically goes quite in his rush against a double team but does not get move back at all against the double team either.I've only seen highlights and the senior bowl for the most part so I have no idea. ...but those are my opinions.

    They have had many opportunities at ILB's and OLB's over the recent drafts and opted for later round guys so I have no idea what they like, look for, or want with regards to those spots. This is only the 1st draft, however, they have had an opportunity to address that DE spot so it will be interesting what they do.
     

Share