Re: Grading the 2010 NFL Draft
posted at 5/2/2010 1:53 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Grading the 2010 NFL Draft
TP3, I like a good debate. My response to yours in red. In Response to Re: Grading the 2010 NFL Draft : The Pats got value, what are you kidding me? The Pats got Taylor Price at 90. I had him ranked at 71...I don't think he's a reach. That would mean we took him higher than where he was rated. We took him at 90. CBS had him at 86, Ace at 74. I had him at 71 based on his measureables, 6-1, 204, 4.40, his production (in a poor offense) and his intangibles - hard worker, student of the game. I had him as the 11th ranked WR and he was the 12th taken. So, a reach - no. A project, perhaps. Yes, a run on WRs was on. From 77 to 89, SEVEN WRs were taken including several I liked way better than Price; guys like Shipley, Decker, Roberts and Sanders. We were smart to take Price when we did because he wouldn't have lasted to 113. I would have rather taken a shot at Everson Griffen or Bruce Campbell at that spot but the Pats must have felt the enormous drop for both players were justified. For a late 3rd round pick, Price is a good reward/risk pick.
RESPONSE: OurLads Scouting Services listed Price as "a 4th or 5th round pick", basically because he's so raw. Mel Kiper had him ranked much higher...ahead of Golden Tate, and Roberts. You seem to agree with me that Everson Griffen, Bruce Campbell, and I would add Mardy Guilyard, would have been better choices with the 90th pick. I liked Guilyard better because he could help fill in for Welker, played against far better competition, was a one-man-gang in leading a comeback win on the road against Pitt in the Big East title game, and would have an instant impact as a kick returner...something the Patriots badly need.
RESPONSE: Zoltan at #150...I liked this pick. The Pats desperately needed to upgrade their punting. They also got CAR 2011 2nd round pick (which should be a high one since they lost Peppers and Delhomme). All of this cost them nothing more than moving down a few slots here and there. Tremendous value if you ask me...it was basically free. Maybe we'll package it to move higher in the first.
RESPONSE: I too liked the selection of "Zoltan the Magnificent" at #150. Getting the Panthers' 2nd rounder in 2011 was not free...it cost the Pats the 89th overall pick...which they could have used on Griffen or Campbell. But, that appears to have been a good move. My problem isn't with the way the Pats are manipulating the draft board. My problem is how they've been using their picks since 2005. With the exception of 2007, they've done a terrible job. That is why the team is in decline.
Another value pick was Hernandez at 113, I had him ranked at 46...(got him) in the second round where his talent was rated, yes but not in the middle of the 4th round. The kid was beaten up by the press and obviously feels he has something to prove as evidenced my his refusal to talk to the press following mini camp. You can cut a 4th round pick without much pain compared to a 2nd round pick (like Brace - who I'm stating will end up being a bust). I'm sure BB did his homework on this kid talking to Meyer and also likely grilling Tebow about his team mates. I think you will be pleasantly surprised how good this kid will do for us. Our division foes have all spent enormous resources building great secondaries to stop our air attack. They can now all shut down our deep threat in Moss. So what do we do? We get a couple of big time TEs. One that is 6-6 and runs like a RB with the wing span of a 727 and the other who is a WR in a TEs body.
RESPONSE: An H-back and a good, but injury prone TE, will not free up Moss...especially with Welker gone.
We can now out physical the Revis' and Vontae Davis' of our division. I had McCourty at 30, they got him at 27 and they got Gronkowski at 42, right were I had him...(the points you brought up regarding Gronk, and McCourtey)...are ligitimate points and I don't disagree. I was one screaming that we pay Samuel. We haven't been the same since. It isn't our pass rush per se, its our lack of coverage sacks we used to get. Vrabel didn't go from 12 sacks in 2007 to 4 in 2008 because he aged that much in one year. We lost Samuel, Wilson and Gay after the '07 season. I have the same concern about Gronk's back. You can bet the Pats did a complete medical on him and must be satisfied. They also thought BAL was going to take him so they moved up, so that's two ELITE teams willing to take a shot on him. Without the back issue, he goes ahead of Gresham in the mid 1st. Mayock said when the pick was announced, "The Patriots just stole a first round talent at pick 42."
RESPONSE: There wasn't a pass-rusher available in the 20s that would have trumped a good CB. Sergio Kindle had the bad knee. Because of his back, Gronk could turn out to be another Jeremy Shockey. Don't have any complaints on the McCourtey pick, right now. But, this kid had better develop into a dependable starter...or else heads should roll in the scouting department.
Before Spikes ran the 40 I had him ranked at 40 and we got him at 62. I think he will play better than that...Spikes is more likely a 4.85 guy. He looked to have slipped at the start of his 40 at his pro day then acted like he tweaked a hammy or something on the 2nd run then didn't run again. All the stories from the Rookie camp rave about his instincts, being half a step ahead of the play. Even if he's a two down player, if he can stuff the run (a big problem we had with Guyton there), it's a nice pick.
RESPONSE: Don't have many complaints about the Spikes pick. Ever since Rodney left, the Pats have sorely lacked an intimidator. Spikes could be that guy. In a previous post above, I cited the numerous leg injuries that Spikes dealt with into 2009...including a pulled groin. Those injuries might have negatively affected his ability to run a 40.
The only reach I saw and agree with you on was Cunningham. I was disappointed we didn't get a RB or a higher rated WR but I love the Price pick. He was a guy I was talking about for 119 then he shot up the boards. I think he will surprise people...Only 1 WR who I had rated behind Price went ahead of him and that was Armanti Edwards at 89 to CAR one pick ahead of Price. If you want to talk about a reach, that's your reach. I had Edwards as the 20th best WR at 165 and from an even smaller program, Appalacian State. This was a great draft and a surprising draft because I thought BB would draft from the lines out and he did the opposite.
RESPONSE: I've made my position clear on the Price pick. Again, why does failing to adequately address the problems at DE, pass-rushing OLB, OL, WR, and RB, lead you to believe that this was a great draft...and that the Pats will be appreciably better in 2010?
I would have taken Odrick at 27 instead of McCourty. But BB was likely frustrated at having no kick return game and with Welker on the shelf, having no punter return game this year. He was also frustrated at not being able to get off the field on 3rd and anything. Couple that with not getting pressure on the QB (no coverage sacks) he went with McCourty. As for DE. He brought in Lewis and Warren and drafted Deaderick who played 34 DE. I guess he thinks these guys can do the job certainly better than Jarvis Green as the numbers would suggest. I too was frustrated we didn't make a play for Hardesty, Tate or Gerhardt. I would have preferred any of them over Cunningham. BB must feel he can get another year out of those tired 3 horses.
RESPONSE: So...with still no replacement at DE for Seymour...with no immediate improvement at pass-rushing OLB, no Welker, the same ol' mediocre OL, and with the same old and tired RBs...how are the Pats appreciably better than in 2009?
But as I pointed out on another post we are about $15MM below the 2009 cap so I would think another player or two could be added. I'd take a shot at Westbrook for the right money.
RESPONSE: Talk about old and tired...why add Westbrook? Isn't he, at this stage of his career, a Kevin Faulk clone at best?
The biggest reason this draft was great is that we landed 4 players in the top 62 when most teams got 2 and we added two more players with 7.2 or higher grades giving us SIX PLAYERS WHO GRADED HIGHER THAN 7.2. IN THE DEEPEST DRAFT IN DECADES NOBODY HAD MORE PICKS.
RESPONSE: Again...what difference does it make where the players are drafted, or how many picks a team accumulates...if they are constantly using those picks to select players who can't play?
The Jets struck gold with Revis, no doubt about it and apparently with Sanchez. Both were bold moves that paid off. They also blundered big time at #6 with Gholston. I think they blundered again letting Jones walk in favor of LT who is putting on the 18th green.
RESPONSE: I agree with you on LT. His whine is now much louder than his bark.
At least with Moss we were getting a player who wasn't starting the year on suspension.
RESPONSE: Come on, now. The Jets picked up a pro-bowl caliber WR, for next to nothing. His addition can only make their team better.
The Welker move will go down in history as one of the greatest 2nd round trades.
RESPONSE: No...it will go down as one of the most lopsided trades in NFL history...if Welker can return at 100%.
I don't think Cromartie or Holmes will have nearly the impact.
RESPONSE: Perhaps. But, so what? Their additions certainly have made the Jets a better team.
The Jet's off season moves with guys like LT and Taylor were plugging holes, not addressing the future.
RESPONSE: What's wrong with plugging holes? Weren't not discussing whether the 2015 Jets will be better than the 2015 Pats. We're discussing which team may be better next season.
I am critcal of the Brace pick. I didn't like him in the 3rd round last year and we took him in the high 2nd. Agreed on that. Chung I had as a late 2nd, early 3rd and we took him at the top of the 2nd. That was a reach IMO. We could've had Maualuga at 34 and not needed Spikes this year.
RESPONSE: The Pats could have taken Clay Matthews at #26, last year. But instead, they chose to move down, for GB's 41st, 73rd, and 83rd picks. With those, they used pick #41 to select CB Darrius Butler, pick #73 was traded to Jacksonville for the Jag's 2010 2nd rounder (which they traded as part of the Gronk trade), and the 83rd pick, used to select seriously WR, Brandon Tate. Next, Patrick Chung was supposedly listed as the top player available on their board at #34 (isn't that, in and of itself, an indictment of the Pats' scouting dept.?). Instead, they could have used the selection on OLB Connor Barwin, CB/S Jarius Byrd, ILB James Laurinaitis, or RT Phil Loadholt. If the Pats had taken, say, Barwin and Matthews, they wouldn't have such a major issue getting to the QB. These are serious drafting errors.
Pryor was a solid pick in the 6th last year. Hey, I'm not disagreeing on past drafts. I thought we missed out on a lot of talent and blew a lot of picks. I feel differently about this year. Maybe losing Pioli was a good move.
RESPONSE: Pioli wasn't the problem. BB has the final say. The problem lies with the scouting department.
Sorry, I'm not impressed with much the Jets did this off season. Some of these moves will backfire on them, wait and see. The Dophins on the other hand worry me more. Their defense got really good and Marshall with help that offense. Still everything considered, if Brady stays healthy, the Pats win the AFC East again.
RESPONSE: Whether the Jets surpass the Pats will largely depend on whether QB Mark Sanchez can stay healthy, and continue to improve. Brady vs. Sanchez is still a big Pats' advantage.
Thanks Dad. Nah, I'm going to stay pumped because unlike years past I'm sold on these picks and actually took 9 of the 12 in my various mocks. A++ draft for me until the season starts and I'm proven wrong.
Response: Hope you're right, my son...LOL!!
Posted by Faucetman