In response to sportslover21's comment:
One thing I think is worth bringing up is the Patriots "need" for a defensive tackle. Looking at the roster and depth chart at DT for next season, there is very little room to add anyone, unless it was a significant upgrade. I recognize Wilfork is getting up there, and so is Kelly, but we still have a plethora of young guys who are filling in pretty well this year, and when you insert Wilfork and Kelly back into the equation, will be very good rotational players.
Assuming Sopoaga is gone next year which pretty much a formality at this point with his play thus far plus his contract, this is what we have at the DT position next year:
Wilfork, Kelly, Jones, Siliga, Armstead, Vellano, Grissom, Forston
As it is, with just that group, we will already likely have to cut one or more players that either have contributed this year or have 'potential' like Armstead. To me, Jones is a perfect rotational DT especially in sub packages to rush the passer. He has played well in tough circumstances, but could likely provide more value not playing significant snaps every game. He is pretty much a lock, I'd say. Siliga, albeit in a small sample size has also produced so far, and helped the run defense, maybe similar to Kyle Love (but better?). Armstead still has great promise, and was suppose to be a bigger part of the defense this year, I still think he will get his chance when fully healthy, which is hopefully next year. Just going up to Armstead, you are already at 5 DT without even counting Vellano (who has played significant snaps for us), Grissom, and Forston. I realize Wilfork and Kelly are getting up there, but they are still going to be good players for a few years, and we have great rotational depth behind them already, so I don't think the need is as great as some make it out to be.
In my opinion, the only way adding a DT to the equation truly makes sense is if it provides some type of upgrade to the group we already have. Who in the draft can realistically do that? Louis Nix for sure, but then we have question marks. The only other player is Hageman and maybe a healthy Dominique Easley.
I just think we have other needs that will likely take precedent, especially after we are out of the 1st round. If a player like Nix slips, or if they feel Hageman is that good, then taking a DT in the first would make sense, but beyond that does a mid-round DT really improve us when we have Jones, Armstead, Siliga, Vellano on top of Wilfork and Kelly?
This is where BB's ability to build depth across the roster comes into play as you could probably make a similar argument for most of the "positions of need".
One position that isn't dicussed much, but looks relatively thin on paper... and in terms of production is DE/OLB... sure you have Chandler and Nink, but Carter is on the downside and Bequette hasn't proven anything and while he's showed flashes, Buchanan (who I like) is still unproven.
Not saying they'll look at an edge rusher early, but a case could be made for one, to join rotation.