In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

In our situation, I'd draft the Best Player Available that isn't a QB or TE in the 1st round, if we can't trade back.  If we do in fact pick at #29 and the best player on the board in BB's eyes is an O-Lineman, then that's fine by me.

In response to WazzuWheatfarmer's comment:

I agree BPA, if they can't move out.  The key is QB's.  If we see 1 go in the first 10 picks then the 2nd rd is where at least 3 will go.  However, one team will move up to get their guy.  NE would be a perfect spot to pick up that QB.  The area with value seems to be around picks 40-100.  The influx of underclassmen has made it a strong class for DT, S, WR and CB. RB and DE, OT, OG are avg. TE is limited. It seems what the NEPats need fits well with the quality that is available.  Again, if we are active in FA and fill some needs BPA will fit the bill.

In response to WazzuWheatfarmer's comment:

I don't like the BPA logic when it comes to BB and the draft. It seems in the first when he goes that route he tends to fall on his face, but when he drafts for need he hits homeruns.

Watson, Maroney, Meriweather were all BPA type of players. Wilfork, Mccourty, Jones, Mayo, Mankins were all need type of picks. One thing about BB though is, with the exception of Brace and Cunningham he is dead on when drafting front 7 players in the first 2 rounds. I'd still let him target a DL first and foremost over any other position, I wouldn't touch WR in the 1st, after that though I'd be willing to take BPA between CB and OL

In response to PatsEng's comment:

I don't remember on Watson but Maroney and Meriweather were absolutely NEED picks that year. Unfortunatley for the Patriots, as is often the case, Nelson and Griffin were already gone. Also unfortunately they just chose the wrong RB, they took the platoon guy over the guy who was unstopable in college even though he was the only real weapon his team had on offense.

Wilfork was just a flat-out gift. I do not recall "anyone" expecting him to slide to the Patriots. I do not recall if he was a need that year but he was absolutely the BPA at that point.

Mankins was just one of those guys they fell in love with. Prior to a day or two before the draft he was not on anyones 1st round mock that I recall and then it broke that the Patriots loved him.

Brace was an absolute need pick for security and leverage. They were trying to cover themselves in the event that the WIlfork hold out did not go well.

...at least that's my recollection but then again it might not be what it used to be.

In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

They went from Smith to Dillion and have never really relied heavily on RB's in the past so I wouldn't call a RB in the 1st a need pick by anymeans. BB's has always been willing to find RB's in the market to fill roles, esp in the year Maroney was taken so I don't consider him a need pick. I even remember that draft the commentators say the Pats get richer with a luxury RB pick.

Meriweather you might have a case for, but they had Sanders, Wilson, and Harrison going into the draft. Sanders and Wilson were both playing at acceptable levels and Harrison was a SS not a FS so again I wouldn't say Meriweather was a need. Might have been a nice upgrade but they had starters going into camp at his position.

We got lucky Wilfork dropped but it doesn't mean we didn't need a NT at that time. We had Washington I believe the year before who was ready to retire and no one behind him.

Mankins regardless whether they fell in love with him or not they needed a starting G as they had maybe 1 starting RG (Neal)

Brace was an absolute need pick that blew up but I fully admitted that so not sure what your question was towards him?

In response to PatsEng's comment:

 

In response to WazzuWheatfarmer's comment:

 

In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

 

In response to sportsbozo1's comment:

 

I'm smelling a BB special : At 29 if they remain there Barrett Jones.

 

 

would you spend a 1 round in a offensive lineman? we are good at OL not great but good

 

 

In our situation, I'd draft the Best Player Available that isn't a QB or TE in the 1st round, if we can't trade back.  If we do in fact pick at #29 and the best player on the board in BB's eyes is an O-Lineman, then that's fine by me.

 

 

I don't like the BPA logic when it comes to BB and the draft. It seems in the first when he goes that route he tends to fall on his face, but when he drafts for need he hits homeruns.

 

Watson, Maroney, Meriweather were all BPA type of players. Wilfork, Mccourty, Jones, Mayo, Mankins were all need type of picks. One thing about BB though is, with the exception of Brace and Cunningham he is dead on when drafting front 7 players in the first 2 rounds. I'd still let him target a DL first and foremost over any other position, I wouldn't touch WR in the 1st, after that though I'd be willing to take BPA between CB and OL

 

 

Fair enough.  I'm beginning to agree with you about not touching a WR in the 1st.  I really like Hopkins, but I think there will be better value available at #29 than him.  Someone will fall, always happens.  If we were to be able to trade back into the 40's or so, I'd be a lot more comfortable drafting a WR there.

Pick #29 

Tennessee WR Cordarelle Patterson

Clemson WR DeAndre Hopkins

Washington CB Desmond Trufant

*Trade* to Bills for pick #41 + 2013 4th 

Pick #41 

WV WR Tavon Austin

Texas DE Alex Okafor 6-5 260

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExvDtq8Whq0

Pick #59

S.Eastern Louisiana CB Robert Alford 5-10 186

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHdnD850l6g

Pick #91

Texas WR Marquise Goodwin 5-9 180

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Je7sPrc4RnQ

4th round (from Bills)

Kansas State WR Chris Harper 6-1 228

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trVKhJt7MkM

7th round

Oklahoma SS Javon Harris 5-11 206

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTICcte6yn8&list=LLUbb484EiputGY3ZAjLBX5w&feature=mh_lolz

7th round

S. Carolina TE Justice Cunningham 6-4 264

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDCV12XwmIU&list=LLUbb484EiputGY3ZAjLBX5w

By way of oversimplification, a drafting philosophy that espouses drafting the BPA irrespective of team needs has its merits. As in all philosophical "what if" discussions there should be qualifiers before committing to that strategy.

For example, the Patriots drafted  Tavon Wilson in the second round in the 2012 draft because of NEED as well as the opinion that TW was the best S/CB prospect available. Within easy reach was a blue chip OL prospect (Peter Konz) who fell to the 55th pick because of concerns over a history of ankle concerns. The BPA concept pitted an almost unknow S/CB prospect against a future hall of fame OL selection. It wasn't a purely BPA concept but one based on BPA at a position of need. The Patriots could have moved up to select Konz (who has already distinguished himsel with Atlanta) instead of the "reaches" in later rounds.

More germane, in the 2013 draft most would agree that our greatest need is for a penetrating DL. Do we select the BPA among DL or do we look to draft the highest graded player on the board? Some have already opinioned that we're so strong at QB, TE and RB that with those exceptions we should look at BPA. When comparing two or more prospects with similar draft grades we would be inclined to take the one that fits our system best or best reflects team needs.

Once again reflecting on our 2012 third round selection who has yet to prove his worth, we were again stressing a position of need. The rest of the 2012 draft seems equally puzzling in that higher drafting grades (Patriots system) were assigned to players who had good (not great college performances) with the exception of Dennard.

While we struggle deciding who the Patriots should draft, what exactly IS the Patriots system? While many love the concept of drafting the BPA it's clear that the Pats have more often looked at BPA at positions of need at least in recent drafts.

To those that like the concept of drafting the BPA, when should this drafting approach be utilized? Do we first fill positions of need in FA and then draft into the postional strength of the 2013 draft irrespective of positions of need? Or do we trade down to multiply our selections when apparently similar values exists between the 29th pick and the next 40 selections?

In response to moskk's comment:

Well said.  The consensus "BPA" among the experts, scouts, etc. seems to nearly always differ from BB's thinking.  I think that the main reason for this is because Belichick looks for who can fill a specific role on the team, rather than who is the better overall player.  Is this the best method of drafting?  Maybe, maybe not.  Belichick has had his fair amount of misses on draft day, but in my opinion he has done very well with through the years all things considered.  It is hard to argue with the team's sustained success over the past decase plus, so BB is certainly doing something right.  I think that this is why Patriots fans can enjoy following the draft so much.  You can be guaranteed to be suprised by the results every year. 

In response to moskk's comment:

The wild card is gauging BPA according to mainstream publications/perception (which can vary greatly) vs. BPA according to BB/NC. 

I have seen various posters list positions of need as S, DT, WR, CB. Some also mentioned DE. 

No particular order above. In terms of FA, I think if you agree with the above positions of need, need to ask, what positions have the best FA's depth wise and which (ranked) typically get paid the highest? I would do the same exercise with the draft in terms of depth through round 3 specifically. 

seems like good depth at DT, WR and cb in this draft. There are a few good safeties, but I think the quality drops off considerably after round 2. Honestly, if we are looking for a starting safety, Matt Elam is the only kid I am looking at. If for depth, there are others. It will depend a ton on tavon Wilson...can he be a starter or more like a situational player? 

There are some good safeties available in FA, but will be costly. Same with DT like Melton and Starks. Cb as well. WR there are a few, but some we can pickup t reasonable cost like amendola or hartLine. Are they fits? Yes, but not elite if this is what we are looking for. 

Personally, if we let welker walk, I think we have to replace him with a vet. I am not confident in bb drafting here, nor the offensive learning curve For our systeM. On the DT position, I think we can draft here given the depth and draft someone who can compliment vw at a cheap price. At CB, Talib is going to cost . given his injuries, and question marks, I may not decide to pay him. However, given we have a young secondaey, are we forced to sign him for continuity purposes? If we don't sign him, I would,look to grab a cb high in this draft. If we go this route, I am paying for a certain safety and getting the best one out there.

so, in summary, how it pertains to FA and the draft...

1. Round 1...drafting Hankins, Richardson, jemkins at DT if available, if not, grabbing Rhodes at cb

2. Round 2... If Rhodes drafted round 1,  I grab kawaan short, floyd or Bennie logan...If not drafted, imam grabbing poyer, Trufant at cb.

3. Signing gholdson or Byrd to play safety. Delmas or Moore alternative.

4. Signing another WR If welker walks. Don't know who yet...maybe hartline, Bowe, jennings

5. Drafting WR in round 3...Swope, da'rick Rogers, others...depth and development, contributes some in year 1, but we are signing another WR in FA...

In response to PatsEng's comment:

 

In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

 

In response to PatsEng's comment:

 

In response to WazzuWheatfarmer's comment:

 

In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:

 

In response to sportsbozo1's comment:

 

I'm smelling a BB special : At 29 if they remain there Barrett Jones.

 

 

would you spend a 1 round in a offensive lineman? we are good at OL not great but good

 

 

In our situation, I'd draft the Best Player Available that isn't a QB or TE in the 1st round, if we can't trade back.  If we do in fact pick at #29 and the best player on the board in BB's eyes is an O-Lineman, then that's fine by me.

 

 

I don't like the BPA logic when it comes to BB and the draft. It seems in the first when he goes that route he tends to fall on his face, but when he drafts for need he hits homeruns.

 

Watson, Maroney, Meriweather were all BPA type of players. Wilfork, Mccourty, Jones, Mayo, Mankins were all need type of picks. One thing about BB though is, with the exception of Brace and Cunningham he is dead on when drafting front 7 players in the first 2 rounds. I'd still let him target a DL first and foremost over any other position, I wouldn't touch WR in the 1st, after that though I'd be willing to take BPA between CB and OL

 

I don't remember on Watson but Maroney and Meriweather were absolutely NEED picks that year. Unfortunatley for the Patriots, as is often the case, Nelson and Griffin were already gone. Also unfortunately they just chose the wrong RB, they took the platoon guy over the guy who was unstopable in college even though he was the only real weapon his team had on offense.

 

Wilfork was just a flat-out gift. I do not recall "anyone" expecting him to slide to the Patriots. I do not recall if he was a need that year but he was absolutely the BPA at that point.

Mankins was just one of those guys they fell in love with. Prior to a day or two before the draft he was not on anyones 1st round mock that I recall and then it broke that the Patriots loved him.

Brace was an absolute need pick for security and leverage. They were trying to cover themselves in the event that the WIlfork hold out did not go well.

...at least that's my recollection but then again it might not be what it used to be.

 

They went from Smith to Dillion and have never really relied heavily on RB's in the past so I wouldn't call a RB in the 1st a need pick by anymeans. BB's has always been willing to find RB's in the market to fill roles, esp in the year Maroney was taken so I don't consider him a need pick. I even remember that draft the commentators say the Pats get richer with a luxury RB pick.

 

Meriweather you might have a case for, but they had Sanders, Wilson, and Harrison going into the draft. Sanders and Wilson were both playing at acceptable levels and Harrison was a SS not a FS so again I wouldn't say Meriweather was a need. Might have been a nice upgrade but they had starters going into camp at his position.

We got lucky Wilfork dropped but it doesn't mean we didn't need a NT at that time. We had Washington I believe the year before who was ready to retire and no one behind him.

Mankins regardless whether they fell in love with him or not they needed a starting G as they had maybe 1 starting RG (Neal)

Brace was an absolute need pick that blew up but I fully admitted that so not sure what your question was towards him?

 

 

Smith and Dillon, Dillon especially played played a huge part of their success. Dillon was on his last legs and effectively gone since they knew they were not keeping him and they did not have a feature back to follow. I believe it is why they drafted one in the first round and it was widely speculated that they should take one but might not because of the reasons of possible philosophy/opinion on value of the position, as you mentioned. In his 2nd year, after Dillon left, he ended up starting half the games and was a big part of the team winning in the post season prior to the superbowl. Back to back 122 yard rushing games. A Huge one against the chargers, saving Brady's bacon. Also the draft leading into the 2007 year was not a deep one for RB's. I still maintain it was a need pick. Just the wrong one. Just my opinion.

As far as Meri, they did have some safties but there were many other factors to that. Rodney was aging. They were not going to keep Wilson, that proved out. They always want to deal from a position of strength and do not wait till the year they HAVE to have the player. They will often try to get a player for during the FA year of the position in question. Meri played in all 16 games, playing both at CB and S. More Nickel CB. It was Samuels, Wilson, and Gays FA seasons and Harrison was on his last legs. Rodney and Hobbs both only lasted 1 more season. They tried to trade up for Revis bu the Rat knew their plans after being the DC for the Pats and offered more to get him for the Jets. They took Meri because he covered both impending needs at CB(previous experience) & S.

The only thing about Wilfork was that he ALSO fit BPA. I was not disputing he was a need, I did not remember. I just don't think its a good example of saying see when they draft strictly for need they do better. Wilfork was both need and BPA was all I was saying.

My only point on Mankins was that if he was a need only and not also BPA for them then why the 1st round? It's the same argument you made "against" Maroney being a need. Not sure they tpyically draft 1st rd guards. I think Mankins probably fit both just like Wilfork. They had a need and just happend to love a guy and was a BPA as well as need for them.

As for Brace I wasn't sure from the way it was written how you interpreted him. I know you said the pick did not work but was unsure in the context that you wrote it if it was a need or BPA fail. I guess I was just giving my opinion on why I felt they drafted him.

In response to mbeaulieu07's comment:

Thanks for the feedback MB

Here's a BB special that would put me in the grave...

they trade Mallet for a 2nd round pick and with their first take QB Matt Barkley.

I still haven't gotten over the Wilson pick last year. I know BB is just plotting another way to show what a genius he is and what morons we all are.

In response to pumpsiefan's comment:

What exactly would be the point of trading your current backup for a 2nd? And taking an overrated, mediocre QB in Matt Barkley in the 1st?

In response to mbeaulieu07's comment:

Yup... Ranking the players is not a science and more art. information is imperfect. Different people can interpret the same information differenrly. a reach in one's eyes may be perfect valuation to another. 

As to BPA... IMO, it's easy to use a pure BPA approach to the draft if you have many holes to fill and are still in the process of building a core for your team. Some teams are in a different situation. They may be one or two holes away from being in position to make a deep run in the playoffs. In that case, you're probably going to draft the best available who fits those holes. 

On the BPA question - I think some people think there is a clear BPA at any point in the draft as if the evaluation of college talent was an exact science. Add in that each team runs different offensive and defensive systems and the idea goes from funny to absurd.

At a team level, certainly they create a heirarchy of talent on their board and if a player rated top ten is available when they are drafting in the second round it would be clear cut. But when drafting at 29 and presuming the top 20 talent has already gone, they probably have five or six players they consider as 'worthy of a late 1st round grade'. BB has talked about fielding trade offers and evaluating if moving back 5 places will allow them to still choose a player they would have taken at the original pick. If the answer is yes, then the trade is a no-brainer. If no, then the compensation becomes the kicker as to whether to make the trade.

Later in the draft sometimes picks are clearly BPA. Mallet in the third round for example, Cannon and Dennard at the back end of drafts.

In response to seattlepat70's comment:

  In most respects your comment represents good reasoning.  However, in the example of Peter Konz (2012 draft) the Pats were not that interested because we had a "good" and stable OL.  Yet two OL defections left us vulnerable and though we filled the holes with"adequate" personnel we did not have a future all pro OL that we could have had.  The contributions of Tavon Wilson paled in comparison to what Konz meant to the Atlanta OL.  Konz represented a dominant OL and a probable 10 year  ALL PRO.  Such is the distinction between drafting for need as opposed to the BPA.


In many respects our team stengths are one injury away from positional weakness and this is the logic of drafting the BPA rather than a situational or borderline talent who could merely represent a stop-gap fill.

 

There is a reliable, hard-working offensive player who has great size and soft hands.  He can catch the football, block like a demon and outwork defenders.  He's made clutch catches and fancy catches, and he is available in a pinch.

His name is Justice Cunningham. 

While he isn't statistically dangerous, anyone who has watched the Gamecocks play knows that he is an underrated and valuable member of the Gamecock offense.

He's the definition of a traditional tight end.  His blocking is on par with a tackle.  He has excellent technique and the ability to knock anyone back.  He's intelligent and capable of picking up blitzes and stunts.

He's also under-valued with his pass-catching.  The offense doesn't use him often, so he doesn't put up mind-blowing stats, but his soft hands and big body make him a reliable third-down weapon. 

For a player like Cunningham, statistics do not show off his true value.  Ironically, he may even see less statistical production with the explosive "Buster" Anderson carving out the role of field-stretching tight end in 2011.  But that doesn't make him a poor player.  In fact, I would go as far as to say that Justice Cunningham has NFL-caliber talent. 

Cunningham would be a capable member of a running team.  If he was targeted more, he could put up big numbers, as he skills as a receiver aren't lacking.

Overall, I hope Justice Cunningham is remembered for the important player he's been, not for the raw statistical data that people will look at in 20 years. 

He's been a great Gamecock and, hopefully, a memorable one.  

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1186787-south-carolina-football-justice-cunningham-is-mr-underrated-at-tight-end

Robert Alford vs Missouri + Lamar 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxJd27EIqHc

In response to Godvernment's comment:

Bottomline is, Ace has been more productive against better comp.  Don't know what you're using to quantify lower body strength (long speed?), but Ace is one of the quicker, more explosive stop/start players in the country, so he's clearly not lacking in that department.  I also disagree with you on the receiving skills piece... Sanders is able to consistently get open,  executes very well in the underneath area... catches the ball away from his body and gets up the field in a hurry and is a threat every time he touches the ball due to his quicks/RAC ability.  He's also been good in the redzone using a quick out or "7" route to quickly seperate.  As for the blocking part... Ace tends to go low, which makes sense due to his height and has been effective in that area, though like most young players (he's only a JR), he can use some work there... I haven't seen much of Goodwin as a blocker, outside of his one crackback block that popped a dudes helmet off, where he was flagged 15 yards.

Look, I see the value of a kid like Goodwin, a speed player with some upside and if he ends up in NE, I'll be pretty psyched, but you haven't really given any tangible reasons to why Ace can't succeed (I'd be surprised if he didn't) as a WR at the NFL level. 

In response to Godvernment's comment:

Seems like the kind of dual purpose TE that they like to employ, I'll check him out.

In response to sportslover21's comment:

Mallett won't be traded for less than a 1rst round pick.

Only looked at a very few players so far but 1st one to jump out is Deandre Hopkins.

In response to sportsbozo1's comment:

Well top 50 I'd trade him for. There are a couple mid round QB's I'd take a look at and like but having 2 picks in the top 50 would warrent moving Mallett. Esp since the level of talent for CB's, WR's, and DT's is suppose to remain relatively high to about 50.