Historically a strong draft?

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

    Historically a strong draft?

     Every NFL draft develops an identity of its own and this draft is no exception.  The strength of this draft appears to be in the "front 7" as well as the receiving corps.  It has been suggested that some rare talent could be acquired and these supposed "sure bets" require only the COMBINE numbers for confirmation.

    As regards the Pats, Kraft himself sounded excited that the Pats had TWO 1st and TWO second round selections where the pickings seem especially intriguing. What exactly are the rumors suggesting?

    Is it QUANTITY or  QUALITY that's generating the enthusiasm?  We recognize that a premiere QB or two might change a franchise's future and that the Offensive line has some very choice selections.  With the new rules being so favorable for the receivers perhaps good prospects now look even better?

    Is it the depth (or lack of separation between players) that's so confounding the  gurus or are we truly about to witness the cusp of greatness in this draft class?

    As for defensive linemen, are we buoyed by "potential" more than performance or stats or is it the measurables (size/speed/athleticism) that seem so different?

    Is this draft as special as some would have us believe?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    Not sure if front 7 is a huge strength. It's got some good talent in the 20-64 pick range but not what I would consider overall strong compared to other years. It doesn't have a lot of top 15 talent compared to last year and doesn't have the depth to really go beyond the mid 3rd.

    The biggest strengths in this draft are the CB's and WR's
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moskk. Show moskk's posts

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    In Response to Re: Historically a strong draft?:
    Not sure if front 7 is a huge strength. It's got some good talent in the 20-64 pick range but not what I would consider overall strong compared to other years. It doesn't have a lot of top 15 talent compared to last year and doesn't have the depth to really go beyond the mid 3rd. The biggest strengths in this draft are the CB's and WR's
    Posted by PatsEng


    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder!  If we arbitrarily take Walterfootball Draft selections as a guide, of the first 20 mock draft picks, 5 are either OL or DL selections making 10/20 in the front 7. The WR and CB selections each account for 3 making them 6/20.  Of course two QBs make it 2/20 etc.

    I think what the excitement is about as regards the WR is the SIZE/Speed/Athleticism in the group as a whole as well as the overall talent as regards the top 50.

    As regards OL, Matt Kalil has been described as...perhaps....the BEST OT in the past 10 years...so perhaps the elation is about the number of elite performers in the first round.

    I wonder if some of the DL are "reaches" relative to the BPA since so many teams lack dominant defensive linemen.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    In Response to Re: Historically a strong draft?:
    In Response to Re: Historically a strong draft? : Beauty is in the eye of the beholder!  If we arbitrarily take Walterfootball Draft selections as a guide, of the first 20 mock draft picks, 5 are either OL or DL selections making 10/20 in the front 7. The WR and CB selections each account for 3 making them 6/20.  Of course two QBs make it 2/20 etc. I think what the excitement is about as regards the WR is the SIZE/Speed/Athleticism in the group as a whole as well as the overall talent as regards the top 50. As regards OL, Matt Kalil has been described as...perhaps....the BEST OT in the past 10 years...so perhaps the elation is about the number of elite performers in the first round. I wonder if some of the DL are "reaches" relative to the BPA since so many teams lack dominant defensive linemen.
    Posted by moskk


    the lines have historically always performed well early in drafts. Mainly because they are the easiest to predict and one of the most vital positions on the team (not named QB). Also when you are talking front 7 and OL right there you have over half the possible positions on the field for the O and D combined so there are bound to be more players chosen at those position just by shear volume. When I look at strength of draft I compare the total talent and depth of positions from draft to draft not positions within the draft. Compared to last year the talent in the front 7 doesn't match last year nor does the depth of talent. However, CB's and WR's compared to former years have a number of players that might go later in the draft then in past years just because of the depth and talent at that position.

    For example Floyd is considered the 3rd or even 4th best WR in the draft (Blackmon, Wright, and Jeffery 'if he runs in the 4.5's' are all considered comparable if not better talents).
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    In Response to Re: Historically a strong draft?:
    Kraft said the same thing last year. Don't listen to the moron Tony Mazz who reads into everything wrong when talking about the Pats. Kraft is simply reinforcing the idea that for the 3rd year in a row NE has 2 1st rd picks and multiple 2nds, which of course, means BB will have no worse than a B grade draft for the 3rd straight year. In other words, Pats fans have a strong, bright future to look towards aa compared to most franchises.   Keep things in perspective. As much as the Pats offense blew an opportunity to win the game in the 4th on back to back drives, the opportunity is there to improve. The D is ascending, hopefully with O'Brien gone, they can wake up and realize Brady must be reined in for this team to win a SB.
    Posted by RustyGriswold


    yea i hope they do get him some help in the back field or use ridley and vereen more....his arm might fall off if he continues to throw it so much.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Pats7393. Show Pats7393's posts

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    The strengh of the draft today will be viewed different next week, a month from now and looking back three years from now.

    That said it seems there some talent at CB going into the 3rd round, OT outside top 3 there's really nothing there for a team looking for a LT.  OG there's some good depth but those you can always get one later rounds and Pats do because of their all century coach.  DL, I see height weight speed quickness but then you look at some of these guys stats and watched them during games and the two just don't add up.  So this could be a strong draft or a bust filled one.

    WR, this one I like.  I see a few guys into the 4th round that I would consider. My favorite and someone I hope they draft is Marvin Jones 6'2" 200lbs from Cal.  He's a projected 4th rnd kid but with his tape, how he looked at the Senior Bowl and how he should run/drills/hands ect he will rise very quickly.  You will start hearing his name more often. Cal played pro style of this season and Jones had good numbers without a great QB.  He can run the full route tree and make the tough catch.

    Good read on jones

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

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    In Response to Re: Historically a strong draft?:
    It's the other myth about the team.  I hate the "this is a passing leaguer/passing team" line. Hate it.   So beyond annoying and it just plays right into Goodell's hands.  He loves how NE scores 30 points on bad teams or in garbage time for ratings and fireworks, but we just play right into it. Ugh. We lost this SB due to the fact we had an inferior OC and the Giants OC has a better relationship with Gomer Jr, as compared to O'Brien and Brady. We've lost two SBs with an apparent obsession with that pass first and often mantra.  Just awful. Just because there is more passing now, doesn't mean you ignore the run or throw half the playbook away.  How many more year will this go on? Brady will be 37 and on one leg and he'll be telling BB he can pass to win. lol Just get a bruising 20 carry back in here.  Trade for Maurice JOnes Drew.  This depp threat concept is so overblown, too. Do we realy want a repeat of SB 42 with 49 passes and 40 of those being 20 yards or more? Bedard was saying how NE's Run blocking was worse than last year. Of course it's worse, they passed 60+% of the time and we were predictable who we used and when we'd run. It's not like the O Line regressed. In fact, it was superior to last year's both in talent and depth. I also chuckled at his grades. He said Mankins wasn't as good as 2010 and then gave him an A. Unreal.  None of it make any sense.
    Posted by RustyGriswold


    you think we can get MJD ? 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from FishTaco64. Show FishTaco64's posts

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    I like MoJo, but what about Arian Foster as a trade possibility? Would probably come a little cheaper then MoJo and is an absolute beast. A threat to take it to the house any time he touches the ball.
     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    Bro, I would love to have MJD here its just I REALLY doubt BB would do it.

    Foster might end up available for a 1st  and a contract so that might be more realistic but I wouldn't bet on it.

    Plus, I doubt BB would be up for spending a 1st plus big money for a RB a year after spending a 2nd and 3rd rounder on RB's.

    I would love to see Foster or MJD here but its just HIGHLY unlikely. Honestly, I pray Ridley improves on his ball security, Vereen stays healthy and gets touches and McDaniels/BB/Brady all realize we will need a good running attack to win the SB.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moskk. Show moskk's posts

    Re: Historically a strong draft?

    In Response to Re: Historically a strong draft?:
    It's the other myth about the team.  I hate the "this is a passing leaguer/passing team" line. Hate it.   So beyond annoying and it just plays right into Goodell's hands.  He loves how NE scores 30 points on bad teams or in garbage time for ratings and fireworks, but we just play right into it. Ugh. We lost this SB due to the fact we had an inferior OC and the Giants OC has a better relationship with Gomer Jr, as compared to O'Brien and Brady. We've lost two SBs with an apparent obsession with that pass first and often mantra.  Just awful. Just because there is more passing now, doesn't mean you ignore the run or throw half the playbook away.  How many more year will this go on? Brady will be 37 and on one leg and he'll be telling BB he can pass to win. lol Just get a bruising 20 carry back in here.  Trade for Maurice JOnes Drew.  This deep threat concept is so overblown, too. Do we really want a repeat of SB 42 with 49 passes and 40 of those being 20 yards or more? Bedard was saying how NE's Run blocking was worse than last year. Of course it's worse, they passed 60+% of the time and we were predictable who we used and when we'd run. It's not like the O Line regressed. In fact, it was superior to last year's both in talent and depth. I also chuckled at his grades. He said Mankins wasn't as good as 2010 and then gave him an A. Unreal.  None of it make any sense.
    Posted by RustyGriswold


    A well balanced offense will show 50% run and 50% pass. It's rare to find an OL that's equally adept at pass-blocking and blocking in run support. The Pat's line is more adept at pass blocking and because of this fact we tend to favor the pass. In doing so we become more predictable and this offers an advantage to an aggressive DL.

    An OL that has a truly great running game can make yardage despite being predictable if everyone executes.  It's a gross misconception to expect even an elite RB to be effective if the OL cannot contain a defensive thrust.  An effective OL will have the ability to surge through a defensive line by by sheer strength (when required), by using stunts, misdirection etc., to create holes and even to neutralize LB effectiveness. We don't presently have that capability and until we do our running game will remain a step-child of the passing game.

    I therefore can't incriminate TB with guilt for electing a passing game over a running game.  Even still, consider how effective our passing game could have been with a more effective Branch (who couldn't get separation) and a GENUINE deep threat to take the top off the defense. Add to that a healthy GRONK and we still could have had SB #4.

    We must improve our running game to keep defenses guessing and to do that we need some upgrades in that line.  The advantage of an ELITEning player on the OL is that such a player is DOMINANT in BOTH the passing and run game. If our running game improves we have better clock management and we improve out TOP to keep the ball away from opposing offenses.
     
Sections
Shortcuts