Draft in Perspective

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

    Draft in Perspective

    When you put it all together I think it was a good draft. The expert ranking of the drafted players by position is not too bad, considering the Pats are at the bottom of the draft order and there are 32 starting players in each position in the league:


    Round 1) Dominque Easley (DT) ranked as the 4th best DT in the draft (even with his knee injuries considered)


    Round 2) Jimmy Garoppolo (QB) ranked as 6th best QB in draft


    Round 4) Bryan Stork (C) ranked as 4th best center in draft


    Round 4) James White (RB) ranked as 12th best RB in draft


    Round 4) Cameron Fleming (OT) ranked as 12th best tackle in draft


    Round 6 and 7:


    Jon Halapio (OG) ranked as 10th best guard in draft


    Zach Moore (DE) ranked as 12th best DE in draft


    Jemea Thomas (CB) not ranked in top 20 by position. Ranked 159th best player available in draft.


    Jermey Gallon (WR) not ranked in top 300 players.


     


    Overall, not too bad of a draft for a team that picks almost last. I know there is some controversy amongst fans as to the order of positions drafted and player capabilities, but put in the above light I'd say pretty good job. 


     

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

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    Pretty much how I feel about the draft also.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    I didn't much care for it.  It didn't address the TE need not to mention DE and LB too.  They did address the OL which is good.  Zach Moore is interesting.  No doubt about Easley being in the crosshairs.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

     



    It's unrealistic to expect any team to solve all its needs through the draft.  There just aren't enough high picks to do that.  You can't get four or five first-year starters.  You're lucky to get one or two, really.  With Easley, I think the Pats may have gotten one guy who will play a lot and have an impact this year.  The rest of the draft gave us depth guys who will compete for back-up roles and maybe, if lucky, get some starts. That's okay. 


     


    What the draft didn't do is solve the TE problem, provide depth at LB, or solidify the WR group.  Remember though, the TE problem is solved if and when Gronk gets healthy, and the WR group may be okay if last year's rookies really can step up this year. Depth at LB is something we can solve through free agency (rookies or veterans who are available now or will become available as camp cuts are made).  So overall the team is in pretty good position going into camp.  My biggest concern is the health of the players . . . there are lots of guys recovering from injuries, but if those guys can play, the team looks pretty solid. 


     


     


     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    I'm happy. I wanted both interior lines addressed which we did.   I love seeing heads blow up during draft weekend.  Now we will have a pass rush and blocking for Brady. 


     


     


    Now you got the easy part done telling me about it.


    Does that handshaped bruise on your back hurt?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    You don't really "fill needs" with a draft, especially if you're a team that has championship aspirations.


    The vast majority of rookies are useless. There are exceptions, Gronk, Andrew Luck, AP, etc. And sometimes rookies have to play by necessity, see the Pats WR corps last year. But usually they're not very good. There's a huge learning curve. Two and three years later is when they start paying dividends (or start their new careers selling insurance). Grading a draft based on pre-draft scouting reports is kind of a joke.  


    The Pats filled needs in the past when they drafted Laurence Maroney and Patrick Chung and Ron Brace and pick-a-failed CB or WR. They probably got good grades for those picks too, at the time. The teams that draft the best, pick the best players available regardless of position. You can't have too many good players.


    I see this Patriots draft as a transitional one, forward looking.  This team is going to have a bigger, more physical offense and a smaller, faster defense going forward. That's what this draft was about, not plugging holes for now. Teams that try and plug holes with rookies, usually aren't very good. The veterans will decide the fate of this team, not draft picks.


    I don't expect much from this rookie class, maybe by season's end one or two of them emerge, like Collins did last year. Collins is a good example, how many people on this board were saying he was just another lousy draft pick around midseason? 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from WazzuWheatfarmer. Show WazzuWheatfarmer's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    You don't really "fill needs" with a draft, especially if you're a team that has championship aspirations.


     


    The vast majority of rookies are useless. There are exceptions, Gronk, Andrew Luck, AP, etc. And sometimes rookies have to play by necessity, see the Pats WR corps last year. But usually they're not very good. There's a huge learning curve. Two and three years later is when they start paying dividends (or start their new careers selling insurance). Grading a draft based on pre-draft scouting reports is kind of a joke.  


     


    The Pats filled needs in the past when they drafted Laurence Maroney and Patrick Chung and Ron Brace and pick-a-failed CB or WR. They probably got good grades for those picks too, at the time. The teams that draft the best, pick the best players available regardless of position. You can't have too many good players.


     


    I see this Patriots draft as a transitional one, forward looking.  This team is going to have a bigger, more physical offense and a smaller, faster defense going forward. That's what this draft was about, not plugging holes for now. Teams that try and plug holes with rookies, usually aren't very good. The veterans will decide the fate of this team, not draft picks.


     


    I don't expect much from this rookie class, maybe by season's end one or two of them emerge, like Collins did last year. Collins is a good example, how many people on this board were saying he was just another lousy draft pick around midseason? 


    [/QUOTE]

    Outstanding post.  Very well said.  

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from OlderbutWiser. Show OlderbutWiser's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    You don't really "fill needs" with a draft, especially if you're a team that has championship aspirations.


     


    The vast majority of rookies are useless. There are exceptions, Gronk, Andrew Luck, AP, etc. And sometimes rookies have to play by necessity, see the Pats WR corps last year. But usually they're not very good. There's a huge learning curve. Two and three years later is when they start paying dividends (or start their new careers selling insurance). Grading a draft based on pre-draft scouting reports is kind of a joke.  


     


    The Pats filled needs in the past when they drafted Laurence Maroney and Patrick Chung and Ron Brace and pick-a-failed CB or WR. They probably got good grades for those picks too, at the time. The teams that draft the best, pick the best players available regardless of position. You can't have too many good players.


     


    I see this Patriots draft as a transitional one, forward looking.  This team is going to have a bigger, more physical offense and a smaller, faster defense going forward. That's what this draft was about, not plugging holes for now. Teams that try and plug holes with rookies, usually aren't very good. The veterans will decide the fate of this team, not draft picks.


     


    I don't expect much from this rookie class, maybe by season's end one or two of them emerge, like Collins did last year. Collins is a good example, how many people on this board were saying he was just another lousy draft pick around midseason? 


    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly. I like what the Pats have done to date this year. On paper it is a better team than the one fielded last year. Draft picking is like a going to Las Vegas ~ a lot of lights, bustling crowds, excitement, shows, and all that glitter, mostly losers and a few winners. I posted this because of all the doom and gloom on the forum related to the draft picks. How does one rate a team's draft? No-one has a crystal ball and I have seen very high picks fail and very low picks succeed. So, outside of luck, the only reference is to use how most experts value the draftees and hope for the best. With that perspective this Pats' draft is not doom and gloom...it looks good.

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

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    You don't really "fill needs" with a draft, especially if you're a team that has championship aspirations.The vast majority of rookies are useless. There are exceptions, Gronk, Andrew Luck, AP, etc. And sometimes rookies have to play by necessity, see the Pats WR corps last year. But usually they're not very good. There's a huge learning curve. Two and three years later is when they start paying dividends (or start their new careers selling insurance). Grading a draft based on pre-draft scouting reports is kind of a joke.  The Pats filled needs in the past when they drafted Laurence Maroney and Patrick Chung and Ron Brace and pick-a-failed CB or WR. They probably got good grades for those picks too, at the time. The teams that draft the best, pick the best players available regardless of position. You can't have too many good players.I see this Patriots draft as a transitional one, forward looking.  This team is going to have a bigger, more physical offense and a smaller, faster defense going forward. That's what this draft was about, not plugging holes for now. Teams that try and plug holes with rookies, usually aren't very good. The veterans will decide the fate of this team, not draft picks.I don't expect much from this rookie class, maybe by season's end one or two of them emerge, like Collins did last year. Collins is a good example, how many people on this board were saying he was just another lousy draft pick around midseason? 


    [/QUOTE]

    I disagree.  It depends on what position.  Matt Light started as a 3rd rounder.  If it's not a skill type position a rookie can start and do well.  Interior lineman, blocking TEs and backup types and it was exactly what this team needed.  I'm not expecting an all pro out of these guys nor do expect a ball skill position player to start off well like the WR corp of last year.  


    TE - You're not going to find another Gronk.  Fiedorowicz or Lynce would had been a nice addition.


    DE - Need to add to the rotation.  I must admit Zach Moore to be very interesting but Kony Ealy would be in my crosshairs.


    DT - My only concern here is the knees.  No question on Easley's talent.  After the Dowling pick I would not want to be bitten again.


    LB - Needed to add on here.


    OL - The 4th round was the right round to get your interior lineman.  Outside of some injury issues I really don't have much of a complaint here.  

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    In response to garytx's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]



    I disagree.  It depends on what position.  Matt Light started as a 3rd rounder.  If it's not a skill type position a rookie can start and do well.  Interior lineman, blocking TEs and backup types and it was exactly what this team needed.  I'm not expecting an all pro out of these guys nor do expect a ball skill position player to start off well like the WR corp of last year.  


    TE - You're not going to find another Gronk.  Fiedorowicz or Lynce would had been a nice addition.


    DE - Need to add to the rotation.  I must admit Zach Moore to be very interesting but Kony Ealy would be in my crosshairs.


    DT - My only concern here is the knees.  No question on Easley's talent.  After the Dowling pick I would not want to be bitten again.


    LB - Needed to add on here.


    OL - The 4th round was the right round to get your interior lineman.  Outside of some injury issues I really don't have much of a complaint here.  


    [/QUOTE]

    They drafted three interior o-linemen and I expect at least one of them to start, probably Stork. Doesn't mean he'll be great, he'll probably be lost at times and will make a lot of mistakes. The OL is actually a very difficult position for a rookie, that's why they tend to pick smarter guys rather than flat out mauler types. Solder and Vollmer played quite a bit as rookies, too. Not entirely great, but they got their feet wet. There are always exceptions, like Light, but OL is not easy to learn for a rookie at all.


    I'm not really seeing the need at DL, they have literally 12 guys between DT and DE competing for what, 8 spots, maybe 9? I'm not even counting marginal guys like Moore or Bequette or any UDFAs.  They'll be cutting some good players. Ealy might be fine, but it's not a major need.


    TE is possibly the one position they could have grabbed someone, but by the time their pick came around in the second, the only decent one left was Fiederowicz (sp?) and they apparently didn't think that highly of him to take him in that round and he went in the third before they picked. He would have been a blocker this year, they can find a blocker TE, maybe one of the UDFAs they signed. Keller and possibly Duncan fill the move roles, who knows what the Jones kid will do? But he sure has size and strength to be a blocker.


    I get the angst over the QB pick, but I'll say again that if the kid is a good player, they'll be happy they got him. If he isn't, then it's a mistake. Time will tell. I've brought this up elsewhere, but Bill Walsh used a second and a fourth to get Steve Young when Montana was 31. Brady will be 37. I'm sure the Niners had needs then, that they could have filled with those picks.  Sometimes you have to think long term. Most guys aren't as secure as Walsh or BB, so they don't operate that way. They deal with not having a QB and they flounder and then get fired. Rinse and repeat.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from makonikyman. Show makonikyman's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    In response to garytx's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    You don't really "fill needs" with a draft, especially if you're a team that has championship aspirations.The vast majority of rookies are useless. There are exceptions, Gronk, Andrew Luck, AP, etc. And sometimes rookies have to play by necessity, see the Pats WR corps last year. But usually they're not very good. There's a huge learning curve. Two and three years later is when they start paying dividends (or start their new careers selling insurance). Grading a draft based on pre-draft scouting reports is kind of a joke.  The Pats filled needs in the past when they drafted Laurence Maroney and Patrick Chung and Ron Brace and pick-a-failed CB or WR. They probably got good grades for those picks too, at the time. The teams that draft the best, pick the best players available regardless of position. You can't have too many good players.I see this Patriots draft as a transitional one, forward looking.  This team is going to have a bigger, more physical offense and a smaller, faster defense going forward. That's what this draft was about, not plugging holes for now. Teams that try and plug holes with rookies, usually aren't very good. The veterans will decide the fate of this team, not draft picks.I don't expect much from this rookie class, maybe by season's end one or two of them emerge, like Collins did last year. Collins is a good example, how many people on this board were saying he was just another lousy draft pick around midseason? 


     


    [/QUOTE]

    I disagree.  It depends on what position.  Matt Light started as a 3rd rounder.  If it's not a skill type position a rookie can start and do well.  Interior lineman, blocking TEs and backup types and it was exactly what this team needed.  I'm not expecting an all pro out of these guys nor do expect a ball skill position player to start off well like the WR corp of last year.  


     


    TE - You're not going to find another Gronk.  Fiedorowicz or Lynce would had been a nice addition.


     


    DE - Need to add to the rotation.  I must admit Zach Moore to be very interesting but Kony Ealy would be in my crosshairs.


     


    DT - My only concern here is the knees.  No question on Easley's talent.  After the Dowling pick I would not want to be bitten again.


     


    LB - Needed to add on here.


     


    OL - The 4th round was the right round to get your interior lineman.  Outside of some injury issues I really don't have much of a complaint here.  


    [/QUOTE]

    Matt Light was 2nd round I believe...

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to garytx's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]


    They drafted three interior o-linemen and I expect at least one of them to start, probably Stork. Doesn't mean he'll be great, he'll probably be lost at times and will make a lot of mistakes. The OL is actually a very difficult position for a rookie, that's why they tend to pick smarter guys rather than flat out mauler types. Solder and Vollmer played quite a bit as rookies, too. Not entirely great, but they got their feet wet. There are always exceptions, like Light, but OL is not easy to learn for a rookie at all.


    I feel the same with the exception of many mistakes.  Plus it adds depth.  I mean we're talking about replacing Wendell here. 


    I'm not really seeing the need at DL, they have literally 12 guys between DT and DE competing for what, 8 spots, maybe 9? I'm not even counting marginal guys like Moore or Bequette or any UDFAs.  They'll be cutting some good players. Ealy might be fine, but it's not a major need.


    Ninkovich and Jones pretty much played the whole year.  Where's the backups there?  The Pats picked up Smith.  A very nice addition I might add.  Then for DT Wilfork and Kelly went out and boy were the Pats in trouble after that.  Chris Jones was a find but that was it.  Yeah, we got a lot of players there but the Pats can ditch most of them.


    TE is possibly the one position they could have grabbed someone, but by the time their pick came around in the second, the only decent one left was Fiederowicz (sp?) and they apparently didn't think that highly of him to take him in that round and he went in the third before they picked. He would have been a blocker this year, they can find a blocker TE, maybe one of the UDFAs they signed. Keller and possibly Duncan fill the move roles, who knows what the Jones kid will do? But he sure has size and strength to be a blocker.


    Arthur Lynce was one that would have been very serviceable.  I wanted to see at least one TE out of this draft.  Effective as a receiver when used.  He could have been used the same way.  Especially when folks are keyed on Gronk.


    I get the angst over the QB pick, but I'll say again that if the kid is a good player, they'll be happy they got him. If he isn't, then it's a mistake. Time will tell. I've brought this up elsewhere, but Bill Walsh used a second and a fourth to get Steve Young when Montana was 31. Brady will be 37. I'm sure the Niners had needs then, that they could have filled with those picks.  Sometimes you have to think long term. Most guys aren't as secure as Walsh or BB, so they don't operate that way. They deal with not having a QB and they flounder and then get fired. Rinse and repeat.


    We agree here pretty much word for word.  Angst over the pick but…..


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    In response to makonikyman's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to garytx's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to Muzwell's comment:


    Matt Light was 2nd round I believe...


    [/QUOTE]

    I looked it up and you are right.  I could have sworn he was a 3rd rounder too.  Thanks for the correction.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ewhite1065. Show ewhite1065's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    As I looked back on the draft Monday I wasn't at all disappointed. The only position they didn't address that I would have liked them to address was TE and if Dustin Keller comes aboard that solves everything. Now it's just a matter of seeing how guys pan out. As many have stated you can't take care of everything in 1 draft but the Pats filled a lot of holes including and especially on the Offensive line. It almost looks like they're bulking up a little to pound the ball.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:


     





    It's unrealistic to expect any team to solve all its needs through the draft.  There just aren't enough high picks to do that.  You can't get four or five first-year starters.  You're lucky to get one or two, really.  With Easley, I think the Pats may have gotten one guy who will play a lot and have an impact this year.  The rest of the draft gave us depth guys who will compete for back-up roles and maybe, if lucky, get some starts. That's okay. 


     


     


     


    What the draft didn't do is solve the TE problem, provide depth at LB, or solidify the WR group.  Remember though, the TE problem is solved if and when Gronk gets healthy, and the WR group may be okay if last year's rookies really can step up this year. Depth at LB is something we can solve through free agency (rookies or veterans who are available now or will become available as camp cuts are made).  So overall the team is in pretty good position going into camp.  My biggest concern is the health of the players . . . there are lots of guys recovering from injuries, but if those guys can play, the team looks pretty solid. 


     


     


     


     


     


     





    This is my outlook as well


    The Pats only really Liked One Player in Easley in terms of making an impact and playing This year. The rest of the picks gonna be inactives for the most part in 14'. The RB and C are gonna make the active roster and compete but I saw lots of guys who will redshirt. Our team is pretty good so I get that but would have liked to get a coverage backer earlier. Last free agent LB to work out was Guyton and he didnt look good after his rookie year. So BB took flyers on his LB/TE in free agency which is ok but a gamble.


    If the C, Stork takes over for Wendell at some point this year and Easley plays a role by midseason and the RB provides a change a pace and insurace for Vareen THIS year and most likely replace him next year and the Guard and Tackle play in 15' and eventually start than thats enough for me. We shall see.


    Am I the only one who sees Jamea Thomas as a S, in the B.Sanders mold?  I think he has a chance to make the roster and replace T.Wilson/Ebner and overtake Harmon on the depth chart. This guy hits harder than any safety we have now.


     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    This was a bad TE class, pure and simple. Teams picked them higher than they were rated because they grabbed at what poor stock was available before the cupboard went bare. BB doesn't ever do that and if you don't know that by now you should open your eyes finally and let it sink in. He hasn't changed his drafting pattern since he became GM.

    Easley, IF HEALTHY, is unlike any other DL in this draft. He's quicker, faster, tougher and just as strong as guys weighing 320+. He's a unique talent and BB told us what direction he wants the DL to move in with this pick. He needs an inside pass rush to make the existing pass rush from the DE's effective. Teams with effective inside pass rushers usually get more sacks and more wins. It's all about getting QB's insecure in the pocket and moving off their favorite spots in the pocket. We learned that when we played the Broncos in the Championship game.

    The 2nd rd. QB? Heck, I'd have waited and grabbed either kid from Georgia or Alabama a few rounds later and taken another DT or DE, or even a coverage LB in  rd. 2, but it's BB's team not mine. I can live with Garappolo if BB can because he knows more about QB play than I ever will.

    Do not be surprised if the three O Linemen we drafted make the squad. The O Line was the reason we lost the Championship game, plain and simple. If BB cuts Connoly and Wendell he saves a net 4 million in cap space and by the end of the season improves the O line. Stork starts at center, Halapio is a primary G backup as is the huge genius kid from Stanford at T. This would not startle me at all. Dante S is not here to save his O line favorites any more. The new coach gets his say.

    The kid from Wisconsin White plays from day 1 and stays in the mix all year. He can provide a consistent safety valve out of the backfield, can pass block, catch on 3rd down and run reasonable well inside and outside the tackles. Unlike Vereen he stays healthy and is dependable and can still catch passes while Vereen's hamstring and wrist are often road blocks to him being effective in the passing game now. Ridley has the dropsies and Bolden is way down in the dog house. White makes the team and plays.

    The 6th round DE either makes the squad outright or the PS, but he might get grabbed off the waiver wire so he just might stick. Bequette is done. Thomas also makes the PS

    TE? They grab last cut waiver wire TE's until Gronk makes it off the unable to perform list. 

    Not perfection, but if healthy, they are a better D and a better squad than last year. If not healthy, who knows...but that would have been the case in any event, draft or no draft.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Draft in Perspective

    I see a lot of what Mel sees


     


    Easely -just hope he isn't damaged goods, ACLs aren't what they used to be, but crossing my fingers  that the whole dline has rotational depth, the 6th rounder is really intriguing and if he makes it too, I am real ok with the draft


    i think Wendell's days are not long, but I think Connelly is staying. I like the new beef up front, I have whole heartily agreed that we lost the afccg starting with the Oline, if not most of the playoff losses. I hope for 2 of the 3to make it


    Garopolla JG from now on, I will just have to wait on. I wanted Savage more, but what do I know, Since Mallet is gone next year, we needed someone this year, we do need 3 qbs for camp. 


    We have an open rb spot, I see an upgrade of the law firm, so ok


    i am really intrigued by 2udfas, the gigantic tight end and the 209 lb 4.40 safety from Rutgers


    I think my biggest concern now is lb, by far
    Pat's Fan lost in Jet Land

     

Share