Draft 5

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ohyes. Show ohyes's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    The running total on your list Z is 23 1st round guy's. That list don't include Freeman and by your standards he is a second any other year. Don't know how he becomes the BPA at 23 with your assessment. I think we all know that the Pats are not taking a QB first anywho. If the Pats had your list of 23 rated just as you rank them and everyone picks before us somewhere for thetop 22 then Davis is there and you take him. I just thought the Pats as well as everyone here would assume the BPA to BB was not a QB.

    From your post's Z

    The problem I see with this draft for NE is that there is very, very little difference between the defensive talent at #23 and at #34. This places NE in a kind of tought spot, because unless you are describing someone slipping to NE from the top-ranks, then it becomes hard to see how any player in there is more or less of a "reach" than any other.

    My contention is that with upcoming need at OL, DL, and TE, perhaps not as pressing as at OLB or other positions, it is still enough to take the better player if that is the case. Simply, if NE thinks Barwin or whoever is there at #34 (I say 50/50 chance) then you take the player you won't be able to get there,

    Anyhow, the fundamental makeup of this draft leaves me with the feeling that NE might end up going offensive at #23 if they think there is value down the line.

    I mean nabbing Pettigrew or Brown and hoping that the one of these Defensive prospects is still there at #34 seems borderline prudent.

    I think if Ne starts thinking about packaging it has to be for the only real "value" guy for them in the draft, and that would be Tyson Jackson-- who slots in like a Ty Warren and would have zero question marks as a 2-gap run stopper, at least less than Hood.

    Maybe there is an outside chance that they *love* Jenkins and if they see him slipping a bit they make a move on a free safety/corner hybrid type player??

    I still think one of the 4 choices with or @#23 is going to get your guy. But I'll edit
    I tried to get your thought's in. You seem to know player's/draft's

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ohyes. Show ohyes's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    I think we all agree that we need an impact player on defense as our top priority.  This doesn't necessarily mean we'll take one with our top pick.  If I were to rank the best defensive prospects for our system that have a reasonable shot at being there at #23 or with a slight move up (no more than adding #89) I'd rank them this way.  Trading #23 and #89 moves us up to between 17 and 18. #1  Rey Maualuga #2  Robert Ayers #3  Darius Butler #4  Ziggy Hood #5  James Laurinaitis #6  Connor Barwin #7  Brian Cushing #8  Clay Matthews #9  Michael Johnson #10 Larry English If we come out of this draft with one of these guys with either of our first two picks I'd say we have a better football team than last year.  Just getting Brady back assures that.
    Posted by Faucetman

    Agreed Faucet   
    I think it's quiet possible we could get two of these guy's with 23&34. I'm not against the packaging of some late picks to move around. We can't keep'em all.

    As for what Kyle said
    i don't see us necessarily needing to move up for Maualuga and we'd be better off with what we get at 23 and whatever other pieces necessary

    Point well made Kyle  
    I think if we stick on the first two picks and BB thinks that these are his guy's. Say Laurinaitis then Barwin OR  Matthews then Johnson. While their not my first choices. It would be fun to see what these to could add to the team going through camp.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Bradythebest. Show Bradythebest's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Very good analysis guys. As we all agree that there is no real stud available at #23, I would trade up and get a sure DL or OL for future. Then in the second round get OLB, CB, SS.

    If not Pettigrew is the only real deal available for us at #23. What you guys think?
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Freeman becomes BPA in a hypothetical to demonstrate the  obivous point that BPA doesn't exist.

    You don't just draft people because they are talented, you draft based on what your team needs down the road. Anyone who watches the draft over a number of years, even casually, should understand this -- as the teams famous for taking talent are the worst teams in the NFL (Houston, Oakland, Detroit).

    And teams that address need/talent in a matrix tend to do well.

    Back to back day one WR for Houston in 2002-3?
    They would have won more games taking the less talented overall palyer at OL, which was a huge need every season, and still is. Andre Gurode or Jordan Gross would have been a better pick than taking Gaffney AND Andre Johnson.

    For instance, I mentioned Pettigrew. If Ne had Thomas, Watson, Baker et al, inked for three more seasons . . . Pettigrew wouldnt' be part of the conversation. And for the same reason, I am slightly skeptical that they will go with an Center (unless he can play guard) even if a tremendous "value" presents itself, simply because they flat out are set at center for the next three seasons.

    Hence, BPA doesn't exist.

    Even last season, BPA@ #7 was Ryan Clady. Every talent evaluator saw this, and it was born out as he was the best LT tackle in all of football last year at pass pro, allowing zero sacks. Mayo is nothing to snuff at either, but if I were building a team from scratch (without the restrictions of ongoing contract issues and NEEDS) I would take Clady every time as he is a better player. But taking him last season would mean Ne would be entering 2009 with a gaping hole at ILB, that would require moving up to meet, or paying huge FA dollars to meet.

    The "BPA" crowd was dead certain NE would take an OT or DL there.

    Suprise. They didn't. They had painful needs at ILB and CB, and that is what they selected. This year there are no dangerously pressing needs, but quite a few mid-term needs based on a major looming free-agent year in 2010.

    That opens things up a bit. So perhaps, even though they have the greatest *need* at OLB in the short term, and long term combined, they can pass up the #1 need, for #2 need based on greater value.

    In short, you approach the draft mindful of three things: Need, available talent, value at position. And if you are draftin high, salary profile at a position becomes very important.

    If you ignore one or the other, you are in deep doo-doo. Like the Lions who turned a 7th overall in R.Williams into a 20th overall from Dallas. And he worked out. Millen's whole justification was that he was taking the most talented player available, and by most scouts' appreciation, he was taking the best talent available. But unfortunately, he ended up with the Fantasy Football type of roster that produces, and the front office that replaced him ended up trading players for cents on the dollar.

    Assume that (again because you seemed to be a stickler there, this is hypothetical) that ILB is a need rated at 9 out of ten, and that DL is 8/10. If the talent gap between two picks is such that the depth at available ILB stays even until your next selection, but there is an immense drop off in talent at DL, between the two picks then the discrepency in value can trump the discrepency in need. But if you have 3 good WR locked up, and a need of 2/10 and there is a talented WR available that you won't get down the line, you pass on him every time, because he merely becomes a spare part, and you will still need DL and ILB, now having one selection to address two pressing needs.

    But under no circumstances would NE take a player they do not need just because he is better.

    And I could provide a laundry list going back a decade where NE passed on supposed "BPA's" to take a player they needed within the next couple seasons.

    And if Jeff Otah, who projects very well into the NFL, but no as well into Ne and doesn't address any huge pressing need is available, and Darius Butler who does address a need that will be huge in the next season, but isn't as talented -- there is no way Ne takes Otah over Butler. Need trumps perhaps absolute talent. I could say the same for Darius Heyward-Bey. He is #23 on the list,if I ranked them, and Ne would pass him up in a heart beat, even if it meant reaching for a player that addresses a need like Ziggy Hood, or Connor Barwin, or (fill your need player in here).

    You aren't collecting talent, you are building a team.

    My estimation is simple: OLB is need #1 by a slight margin. But the players that will fill this might still be availlable at #34, and perhaps marginally lesser needs could be filled with players of a greater absolute value at #23, so you can kill two birds with one stone. Te is looming need. Watson and Thomas are goners in 2010. Baker has a front loaded contract. And BB tends to like to keep two starting caliber TE's on his roster. The need might not be as great as OLB, but it is enough to take a TE first. I could argue the same for DB. Or for ILB. Or for DL.

    I could argue the same for interior lineman, but the fact is that there isn't an elite guard there, so  available talent nixes that.

    Sorry for the expanse here, but I don't want people thinking that I am saying BPA based on what you thought I meant, because BPA is a myth, and is a terrible way to draft.

  • You have chosen to ignore posts from ush. Show ush's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Are the Pats having Pettigrew in for a visit? Have they shown any interest? Anybody know his wonderlic score? I know that they might intentionally NOT have him in for a visit to mislead everybody else. Though his 40 time does suck, I think he would be a solid safe selection @ 23...though Jared Cook and Chase Coffman should be there in late 2nd or 3rd and Cornelius Ingram could be there even @ 100.

    As far as need DL will be a big one next season. Fork, Sey will be looking for bucks and
    Jarvis Green will be a goner most likely. Overall, it seems like DL and TE are 2 positions that have warranted 1st round picks in the past so I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case again. Z seems to think that Tyson Jackson would be our guy if DL was the case...but it seems like Jarrod Gilbert fits the size profile of our DE's too so if we don't go DE @ 23, either 47 or 58 may be an option as well.

    Personally I like Darius Butler (or V. Davis) @ 23 because of the price tag on high quality DB's these days...though it seems like we do have some depth for this season, next year both Hobbs and Bodden are going to be FA's.

    For the record, I hate the idea of taking Donald Brown @ 23.

    To me Maualuga is the sleeper that could drop and if that's the case I think we might bite. ILB is an impending if not immediate area of need and if you can get a guy who could've been top 5 last year @ 23 this year then i think we would.

    Z, your last post was monstrous and spot on.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from ohyes. Show ohyes's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Sorry for the trouble Z
    Not trying to be a stickler just understand.
    The post was a consensus

    [/Quote] In short, you approach the draft mindful of three things: Need, available talent, value at position. And if you are draftin high, salary profile at a position becomes very important.

    I think what your trying to say is.
     Need / Look at team needs both long & short term and how fast you need them

    Talent / who can you pick from that fits your scheme and your ranking of them at one of the positions

     Value /   who's there that fits and who will be left over talent wise and the drop off according to your ranking of said players at your next pick and how bad you need to fill a slot at a givin position

    You assume
    You don't just draft people because they are talented, you draft based on what your team needs down the road. Anyone who watches the draft over a number of years, even casually, should understand this

    I assumed
    That anyone that read the post knew we would fill a need on some level with a 1st Rd pick.

    Again Sorry for the mix-up

  • You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Spot On,

    You nailed it exactly. I would add that value also incorporates salary profile at position, these days. The pressure to take high salary players at high salary spots is enormous. Taking an ILB or NT at #1 overall can mess up the salary strucutre of a team, because it practically doubles down the max contract vets would get there.

    The problem is that people earnestly believe BPA is a thing to do. You would be suprised. Two years ago, right after they inked Warren and Seymour, (I think one season in actually) people were arguing for DE, and people argue OTs when Kazcur and Light were all locked up. And every year (except this year) people argue Rb or WR regardless of what NE needs.

    Like Bb and Pioli would look at each other an say, "you can never have enough big bodies." Or some other cliche.

    This year is great, because as long as you discount starting someone unproven at OLB, there aren't any needs next season, except a third safety, counting Williams as a bubble type player. And we can couple that with the fact that they have openings at a few spots down the road at most positions. So they could go in many directions.

    So it is hard to call. I would think that in descending order RB, WR are very unlikely in the first round. Just based on what they have at the position next season and going down the road. But then these are tricky projections, because none of us know what NE plans to do with the existing players in those roles. Maybe they think  BJGE or Maroney is garbage and at this point he is a body keeping a spot warm? We wouldn't know about that impending need until it happened.

    But with Kaczur (OT), Mankins/Neal (OG), Bodden/Hobbs (CB), no starting OLB, Bruschi on the verge of retiring, and Sey/Fork (DL) all up for contracts, there will be a need for them to fill at all spots.


    Yes. Frankly I am thinking that NE might want to move up from #23, which makes sense based on my impressions of the draft. three to five picks higher and the talent could be better six or more and you are in the thick of some players that simply outclass the group available at #23.

    I think they wait to see who is falling, and then make a move. They haven't worked out Pettigrew or Jackson but I won't rule them out. They have worked out Andre Smith and Jenkins, who are two guys who are above where they should pick. That could be a smoke screen to mask a package to move up for someone else?

    Maybe they honestly think they will slip?? Doubtful.

    I don't know. Maybe they could watch at #20, see who is there, and if any on interesting slips, package a third or fourth to get up a few spots past a couple teams?

    But moving up a little is starting to seem like a possibility just based on the workouts they are holding. You don't smokescreen if the players are off the board, so all I can assume is that it is part of the conversation . . . a very serious part of the conversation.

    Of course, in reality, a move up -- in this situation -- is likely dictated by a player they like, who we don't know about being at a spot where they think they can make a move.

    Say it is a double-smoke screen, LOL.

    Say Jenkins and Jackson are there, they can make a move on Jackson, with the other team thinking Jenkins is the guy they are moving on? Hmm.

    But my point is that they must be thinking of it. Or they could be trying to dupe another team into taking a player they don't like, LOL.

    I think that is what they Pat White thing is about anyhow.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from titletownfan. Show titletownfan's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    I have New England making a couple trades in this mock

    Trade #23 and #58 to Houston for #15 and a 3rd rounder next year.  Trade #124, #234, #204 to Kansas City for their 4th rounder (#102) as well as a 6th rounder next year.  

    #15 Rey Mauluga

    The perfect complement to Mayo, A hard hitter with decent speed despite his combine results.  Despite what many think, I believe him to be a 3 down linebacker, and an anchor to our newly constructed defense for years to come.

    #34 Connor Barwin

    The Pats need a pass rusher, and Barwin is the perfect replacement for Vrabel.  He is versatile, with the ability to play DE, OLB, and TE, and tore it up on his pro day.  Great attitude, hard working, and humble, Barwin seems like a perfect fit for the Patriots, a true Patriots player.

    #47 Patrick Chung

    Hard hitting, some questions about coverage but Rodney wasn't ever a cover specialist either.  Another perfect fit for the Patriots, and could have gone higher without the height questions.  Still, I feel he is the best fit at safety for the Pats, as besides William Moore, the top prospects are the FS type, where we alreay have Sanders and Meriweather.  The Pats need a SS to replace Rodeny, as Meriweather and Sanders are far better suited at FS.

    #89 Lawrence Sidbury

    A DE, possible replacement for Seymour.  I was strongly considering taking Gilbert with #47, and selecting Jennings out of Alabama here, however, I felt safety was a more pressing need.  Sidbury comes from a small school, but he is worth taking here, as he is one of the last 3-4 ends available.  

    #97 Gerald Cadogan 

    Big,6-5, 309, fast (4.99), and smart, this kid has BB written all over him.  At #97, now is the latest we can get a OT, Cadogan may not last but we can all hope.  Better grom Kazcur's replacement so we don't have a rookie starting in '10.

    #104 Rames Barden

    More recieving depth for the Pats.  He is big and fast, and is on the rise.  Will make a good #3 in the Pros.

    #170 Morgan Trent

    Little late for a CB, but we had more pressing needs.

    #199 Andy kemp

    Pats wrap up a top tier draft with a underrated guard.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from thehub. Show thehub's posts

    Re: Draft 5


    This the best mock draft I have seen on this board so far. I hope you are spot on with the first 4 picks.

    I also think BB will move up - we have the picks to deal. Go get the sure thing in RM.

  • You have chosen to ignore posts from ush. Show ush's posts

    Re: Draft 5


    Yeah, I'm not too keen on the whole idea of the Pat White experiment.

    I do like the idea of moving up since we have xtra picks and we're not going to be able to turn them all into 2010 picks....plus it makes sense to use some to move up and get better talent that we can use sooner since we all know the Brady clock is ticking and time is of the essence.

    That looks good to me...except for the Sidbury pick, unless you're going to project him at OLB because he's too small to replace Sey...he only weighs 265 and that means he'd have to add at least 25lbs if not more. Jarrod Gilbert is the right size to play on our DLine though, but i'm not sure he's there @ 89.  I like the idea of packaging 58 w/ 23 and moving up the 8 spots, and also getting a 2010 pick out of it too....good thinking.

    If we took Maualuga, Barwin and then Gilbert @ 47 and we're looking to get a safety still...Rashad Johnson from Bama might be there @ 89...though there are questions about his size, but BB said at the combine that Safeties are turning more and more into DB style players and if that's the case then Johnson fits the profile. The kid played for BB's buddy Saban and is supposedly as smart as they come too...I'm guessing they have their eye on him and don't need to have him in for a visit due to the Saban connect.

    This draft is officially on the clock! Only 12 days away!
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from titletownfan. Show titletownfan's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Thanks Hub,
    Just picking players I feel are best fits with the Pats.  That actually may be my final mock barring any big news.  
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from titletownfan. Show titletownfan's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Ush I was very close to taking Gilbert with the 47th pick, I didn't realize how small Sidbury was, somehow under the impression he was a 3-4 end.  In that case, I think Gilbert is the right choice w/ #47 and Rashad Johnson form Bama would be the pick at #89

    Same trades as last time, just taking Gilbert at #47, and Johnson at #89

    #15 Rey Mauluga
    #34 Connor Barwin
    #47 Jarron Gilbert
    #89 Rashad Johnson
    #97 Gerald Cadogan 
    #104 Rames Barden
    #170 Morgan Trent
    #199 Andy Kemp
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from pats-fan-2007. Show pats-fan-2007's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    If Andre Smith is there @12, then I say send #23 & #47 to the Broncos.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from pats-fan-2007. Show pats-fan-2007's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Overall, I'm getting confortable with the idea of trading up. These are the players I would trade #23 & #47 for:

    1) Andre Smith,OL
    2) Michael Oher, OL
    3) Maclin, WR I watched Maclin on ESPN tonite. He came across as a very intelligent player. Good hands. He's no Chad Jackson.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from cowlick316. Show cowlick316's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    im starting to think that barring a trade up (which is very possible) or an elite player slipping to us the first pick will be either darius butler or brandon pettigrew. not huge needs, but they will be. and both are tremendous players. personally, i would love to see maualuga in a patriots uniform, even if it means packaging the #58 pick. however, i would be happy with any of these 3.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from arodrambone. Show arodrambone's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    I like all three of those players as well, but I'd be more hesitant to trade away #47. 23 and 58 is as much as I'd offer, even if it meant 15 or 16 is as high as we could go.

    Maclin could drop to the Jets at 17, but even then they could go with Wells or Moreno. I wouldn't trade up for Maclin though, especially since Harvin could very well be there at 47, and McCoy could be there at 59. McCoy might be almost as good a route runner as Maclin, even though he's a running back. Maclin doesn't seem that polished as a route runner, and isn't the fastest out of his cuts.

    But as far as those two OL, I'd be very happy to end up with one of them in a trade. Brady is a precious asset that must be protected at any expense, even if the defense suffers a bit as a result. Interesting that the Pats brought Andre Smith in this week.

    Do you know of any second round left tackle prospects that have elite long term potential? Beatty seems like he'll go in the first somewhere.

    It would be very interesting if the Patriots neglected OLB and even ILB in the first couple rounds of this draft. It would certainly open up a range of other opportunities, especially if Jason Taylor is waiting in the wings.

    Two of our biggest immediate needs, linebacker and safety, are at positions cheaply filled in free agency, compared to OL and CB. There are also four rounds of depth at safety this year.

    So many teams go into drafts with multiple huge glaring needs, and we could have several next year. I would hate to go into that draft without stocking up on extra picks or addressing some of those needs in this draft.

  • You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    What'sup Arod,

    Notes on Maclin. I do not think Ne would take Maclin, they just added one of the worst route runners in the NFL in Joey Galloway, LOL.

    For all,

    Trading up? By my calculations #89 should get NE into #18. Denver has two selections, so might be willing to come down.

    I think that is enough to get a sure crack at someone they might be targeting.

    Then, perhaps, NE could deal #58 out for another season and a thrid this year?

    Trying to think of things . . .

    Additionally . . .

    Andre Smith might not seem like the type of NE OL player at first.

    1.) Nick Saban
    2.) Understands the mental part well
    3.) Can move his body and feet well, and not just well for a 330-340 lb guy.

    He would be the largest, and by a margin, offensive lineman that NE has had under Belichik. That alone raises questions.

    I don't think of Oher anymore as the ind of player Scharnecchi would covet for his line. He seems like a great run blocker, bad pass blocker, and inconsistent. Maybe as a RT down the line he has a future.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from ush. Show ush's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    I don't like Oher....everytime i've seen him play (which is only twice) he's been called for multiple penalties. He false started at least twice in the bowl game vs. TTech and I know he had a holding penalty in the Senior Bowl. I'm also not too keen on Beatty who looked overwhelmed by Ayers @ the Senior Bowl. I will openly admit these opinions are not based on in depth research and are more snap judgments than anything. Also, I'd rather take an OL down the board a little...mostly cause it's just not that sexy of a pick...LOL...unless Andre Smith is there, he's a lot sexier than most OL...hahha...but only because he was a top 5 pick before he started sabotaging his draft status.

    I doubt Denver will want to trade out of 18 because I think they feel they need to make a splash PR wise with this draft after the PR debacle of trading the best young arm in the game. In my opinion McDaniels bungled that situation badly and may regret it on a short-term basis...not that Jay 'I'm a bigger baby than you think' Cutler doesn't deserve some blame. It's just that as an unproven 32 yr. old head coach you should probably want to prove yourself at least a little before you start messing with the 25 yr old Pro-Bowl franchise qb. If Denver had built their D into some semblance of an existence then with that O they would have been dangerous. But who knows, Orton may do surprisingly well there and Cutler may go Bledsoe and get happy feet and start throwing picks all over the place. Should be interesting to say the least.

    Also, I predict it will have to be 58 we throw in to move up (unless it's 89 and another later pick) because if you're asking to move up the other team knows there's a damn good reason and will most likely leverage a little more than what the point value is on the draft board.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    I think Denver's "splash" will be a trade up!

    They could look to move higher in the first.

    There is a great possibility that Orakpo, Raji, and Sanchez are gone by #12. And they need talent at all three spots. Sanchez might be a project, but he projects well as a short area finese passer like Cassel, when you have a coach with tight reins.

    Raji answers the biggest question Nolan will have in the transition. He is an example of a near super bue chip guy at a position that just won't see top five very often.

    And then there is Rak-daddy. The guy every 3-4 team would want at OLB.

    All three answer huge burning needs of Denver's, and all three will likely be gone by #12, with Sanchez being the best possibility to "stick."

    Especially if they move up, sacrificing something, they would likely welcome moving the other selection down to spread the value across two selections AND mitigate the level of payout they would be making to all of their rookies.

    Just some possible scenarios in what could be a crazy draft.

    Denver already delt a franchise QB in his prime, with a very good contract for a second first.

    The Browns could end up going into the draft with three first rounders!!!!

    St. Louis are likely aggressively shopping the #2 overall, most likely because paying two #2 rooks in a row will essentially cripple them. I look for them to take a loss in value so someone can move up to take an OT.

    And if Crabtree is gone, I look for the Bengals to try and get out of dodge and move inot a spot where they could perhaps take Maclin . . . unless of course the Raiders take him as "talent" and bungle another draft.

    I think there is going to be a lot of jockeying this season, teams moving around a deep, but not spearheaded pool of talent to get "their guy."

    Maybe the Pats are part of that action?
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Pats7393. Show Pats7393's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    I think a trade up to the top 15 will happen but I think it will with the Redskins at 13 and not for RM.  RM is an awesome player but is not a 3 down LB, he will struggle in coverage.  So if he's not the target (IMO) who would be, I got two names here Andre Smith LT Alabama or Everette Brown DE.  The Skins would get the 23rd and 34th, Pats along with the 13th would also get the Skins third round pick # 80.

    So here's my mock:

    #13 (from Washington) Everette Brown-DE (can play OLB, amazing pass rushing abilities)
    #47 Jamon Meredith OT-Would eventually anchor the left side
    #58 Clint Sintim DE/OLB
    #80 (from Washington) Darry Beckwith ILB
    #89 Chris Baker DT (insurance, in case Vince is not here next year)
    #97 Ramses Barden WR
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    There may be some moving around in the draft but I don't feel it will be in the 1st round.  Talentwise things look better in the 2nd round for moving around.

    Try as the first six to seven picks may they will be stuck with those picks.  As you more than likely know it's about the bucks and I don't see a prospect there that is worth moving up for.  So Detroit, St. Louis and Cincinnati will have to make their selections. 

    Denver I see as letting the draft come to them.  They have a lot of needs.  I don't know if they would want to trade up and lose picks.

    I would think that the 2nd round is where the action would be.  There's about a round and a half worth of those second tier players.  My thinking is that you would see some wanting to move out from the end of the 1st round and some wanting to get into the 2nd round or become more active in the 2nd round.  As much as I would like to see the Pats use #34 and #47 they may get some crazy offers. 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from titletownfan. Show titletownfan's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Little upset we let this post slip to Pg 2.  Now to kick it off.  The more I think about it, the more I am starting to like Rashad Johnson, FS out of Alabama. He has good speed, and is a ball hawk, picking off 11 passes over the past two years.He is a hard worker, who isn't afraid to fight for the ball.  This is a guy who walked on to one of the greatest football programs in America, and went from a walk on RB, to one of the greatest Safeties in Alabama school history.  He was also one of the only junior captains in recent school history.  BB's good buddy Nick Saban dubbed him the smartest player he has ever coached.  With Saban his coach, his transition into BB's defense should be seamless.  Johnson seems like a perfect fit for the Pats.  The Pats should go get him should he slip into the 3rd round, even if it means trading up, they have the chips to do so.  
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    I agree. I think Rashad Johnson is a great alternative. Although part of me thinks that NE would look for a slightly more tackling oriented Safety to offset the fact that Meriweather is already looking more like an Ed Reed than a Rodney Harrison.

  • You have chosen to ignore posts from titletownfan. Show titletownfan's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    Exactly Z,

    I was really only looking at Johnson as a alternative plan should we not get Chung, my top target, or William Moore.  I was simply stating that Johnson would make a great fit for the Pats, though our need is at SS.
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from pats-fan-2007. Show pats-fan-2007's posts

    Re: Draft 5

    I keep thinking that whoever we draft in Rounds 1,2....they need to be impact players.

    We need new players that will step up and make a play late in a game.

    I don't like the idea of drafting for depth....that's what got Bobby Grieir fired.

    TE Ingram in the 2nd or 3rd??

    Does Beattie project as a dominating LT? Great athelete, but lacks power. Can he bulk up and get stronger?

    Does Clay Mathews continue to improve and become dominating?
  • Sections