The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

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

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    I don't think RM was on the draft board higher than a late 3rd or 4th rounder for the Pats. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]No. The question is whether Chung and McKenzie are better prospects than Maualuga and the safety alternative. There is also a different question of whether BB saw Maualuga as a better prospect than McKenzie. The question of Chung and Maualuga doesn't have much relavance, the apples to oranges comparison.
    Posted by KyleCleric2[/QUOTE]

         We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Chung was chosen at #34, where Maualuga could have been chosen. Had Maualuga been chosen, a safety presumably would have been chosen later...instead of a linebacker prospect.

         It isn't an issue of whether BB saw McKenzie as a better ILB prospect than Maualuga. BB obviously thought Chung was a better prospect, or met a greater need to the team, than Maualuga. So, the selection was made. It remains to be seen whether BB made the right choice. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]I don't think RM was on the draft board higher than a late 3rd or 4th rounder for the Pats. 
    Posted by Pats7393[/QUOTE]

         Thats' highly doubtful.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from KyleCleric2. Show KyleCleric2's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    I don't believe that Maualuga was on our draft board or he was significantly downgraded.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]I don't believe that Maualuga was on our draft board or he was significantly downgraded.
    Posted by KyleCleric2[/QUOTE]

         Are you privy to any information to back you up on this? Or, is this mere speculation on your part? After all, the Pats took WR Brandon Tate relatively high (#83 overall). Tate will most likely will be on injured reserve this season, rehabbing a serious knee injury. Furthermore, he had tested positive for weed at the Combine, despite knowing in advance that he would be tested at that time. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    I would agree with the other two. I don't think RM was even on their board, or that if he was he was very, very low.

    In so many words BB has said, they look at a player and what he can do here. Not what he did in college.

    There were a couple of things to like about RM, but a bunch to dislike.

    Like
    Hitting
    Instincts

    Dislike
    Maturity (see the grinding the reporter on youtube)
    Questionable surroundings (USC is loaded)
    Intelligence
    Absolute Athleticism

    The bottom list has some high point earners with BB.
    Tackling alone is a huge one. Watching RM over time, he misses a bunch of tackles because he is overpursing (misdiagnosis + his instincts= blown play) or for gearing up to make a huge hit and getting run by.

    When you have Taylor Mays behind you, and the opposing RB is from Cal, then it can go unnoticed. But BB has to assume that he has the worst safety on the team (Sanders for instance)and that the running back is someone nasty like Adrian Peterson. Thus he might prefer someone like McKenzie who is a great wrap-up tackler and a really good hitter as well -- although RM can bring the lumber.

    But I think the ultimate decision came down to whether RM could digest an NFL playbook like NE's and whether he was mature enough to step into a spot that is essentially in the center of the defense.

    If you notice in his commendations of Chung and McKenzie, he hits on how they were both signal callers and both very mature (he doesn't note that that both almost scored double what RM did on the wonderlic, but it is out there).

    Everyone said, two down linebacker, two down linebacker. But if scouts really thought of him as a two down kid, he wouldn't have even gone in the first three rounds. Guys like that (Jasper Brinkley) tend to go much later.

    The question surrounded larger more fundamental issues about the player.

    And I would say Chung hits on all cylinders on that rubric:

    Mature
    Intelligent
    Hard Hitter (best in the draft lb for lb)
    Only real "star" on Oregon defense (Byrd is good too, though)
    Great tackler
    Great Athlete
    Fantastic Instincts

    Plus versatility as a special teams returner and awesome ST gunner.

    It equals a better over-all prospect.


     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from KyleCleric2. Show KyleCleric2's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    They also worked out Tate a couple of times. Being able to keep Tate on the team without putting him on the 53 man roster also gives Tate value to the Pats. If he does play, Tate offers 1st round quality receiving ability and the best return skills in the draft.

    We all know about Maualuga's weaknesses and strengths entering the draft. No doubt he has the talent. I wanted him at those picks. On the other hand, BB and the scouts may not have liked him for third downs. They may not have liked his tendency to over pursue plays. They may not have liked his measurables. They may not have liked his character red flags. There are definitely reasons for the Pats to pass on Maualuga or drop him to later in the draft on their board.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]I would agree with the other two. I don't think RM was even on their board, or that if he was he was very, very low. In so many words BB has said, they look at a player and what he can do here. Not what he did in college. There were a couple of things to like about RM, but a bunch to dislike. Like Hitting Instincts Dislike Maturity (see the grinding the reporter on youtube)

    RESPONSE: Really?? Do you have the YouTube cite on this? 

    Questionable surroundings (USC is loaded) Intelligence Absolute Athleticism The bottom list has some high point earners with BB. Tackling alone is a huge one. Watching RM over time, he misses a bunch of tackles because he is overpursing (misdiagnosis + his instincts= blown play) or for gearing up to make a huge hit and getting run by.

    RESPONSE: Good points. What I remember most about him was that great Rose Bowl performance he had two years ago against Illinois...when he looked like a man playing against boys.

    When you have Taylor Mays behind you, and the opposing RB is from Cal, then it can go unnoticed. But BB has to assume that he has the worst safety on the team (Sanders for instance)and that the running back is someone nasty like Adrian Peterson. Thus he might prefer someone like McKenzie who is a great wrap-up tackler and a really good hitter as well -- although RM can bring the lumber. But I think the ultimate decision came down to whether RM could digest an NFL playbook like NE's and whether he was mature enough to step into a spot that is essentially in the center of the defense. If you notice in his commendations of Chung and McKenzie, he hits on how they were both signal callers and both very mature (he doesn't note that that both almost scored double what RM did on the wonderlic, but it is out there).

    RESPONSE: Good points, again. Do you know what the Wonderlic scores were on Maualuga, Chung, and McKenzie? 

    Everyone said, two down linebacker, two down linebacker. But if scouts really thought of him as a two down kid, he wouldn't have even gone in the first three rounds.

    RESPONSE: I tend to disagree here. Ted Johnson was a two down player who went in round two. Besides, if you wish to believe the Bengals, they had numerous calls for their 38th pick, who allegedly wanted to trade up to take Maualuga. 

    Guys like that (Jasper Brinkley) tend to go much later. The question surrounded larger more fundamental issues about the player. And I would say Chung hits on all cylinders on that rubric: Mature Intelligent Hard Hitter (best in the draft lb for lb) Only real "star" on Oregon defense (Byrd is good too, though) Great tackler Great Athlete Fantastic Instincts Plus versatility as a special teams returner and awesome ST gunner. It equals a better over-all prospect.

    RESPONSE: Good points about Chung and McKenzie playing on less talented  teams. But, couldn't the fact that Rey was playing with so many talented players worked to reduce his stats, as well as lessen his defensive responsibilities?

    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]We all know about Maualuga's weaknesses and strengths entering the draft. No doubt he has the talent. I wanted him at those picks. On the other hand, BB and the scouts may not have liked him for third downs. They may not have liked his tendency to over pursue plays. They may not have liked his measurables. They may not have liked his character red flags. There are definitely reasons for the Pats to pass on Maualuga or drop him to later in the draft on their board.
    Posted by KyleCleric2[/QUOTE]

         Since the NFL has become pretty much a "passing league", that would tend to reduce Rey's value, and increase the value of a player like Chung. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    The youtube thing! Sure. It is the first hit after Rey Maualuga. For all his big hits, this is his legacy on the internet.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdDGYsYXHKc

    I am sure coaches see pranks like this on national TV and do not like it. Here is the litany on his character:

    -- He was arrested in November of 2005 for suspicion of misdemeanor battery following a fight he was involved in during a Halloween party. He turned himself into authorities and agreed to attend anger management and Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, as well as perform community service.

    -- Maualuga was also disciplined for his involvement in an incident at a fraternity party in October of 2006.

    -- Was demoted to special teams versus Oregon State that season after he overslept a meeting.


    Wonderlics:
    23/42
    21/43
    15/33

    IIRC the test gets scaled after that which is where the final digits come from.

    Suffice it to say that the average at LB is 19 and the avg at saftey is 19 this year, so they picked up the above average guys with wonderlic scores. 15 is very, very low.

    As far as T. Johnson goes, I will only say that they didn't draft him with two-down LB on their mind. Ted Johnson was a full time linebacker who became a two-down guy later on in his career. I have been a major draftnick for almost a decade, and I can only say that two down linebackers don't go in the first or second, and if they turn out that way they are a dissapointment. That is just my take from experience, YMMV.

    Yeah, the program question is age old man. I don't think coaches pay much attention to stats, except for sacks and sometimes INTs on defense.

    I try not to. Different players are used differently. The question is, can he be relied upon when he isn't surrounded by those all-stars. It isn't about 100 tackles, it is about one tackle.

    It is how the kid looks. Case in point is Keith Rivers. Statistically he was about the same as RM. They aren't even in the same class as prospects. Not by a longshot. Just watch USC and you'll see it. RM was a fericious hitter. Rivers was a tackler, hitter, cover man, blitzer, whatever you want him to be, and had a whole different playing speed than RM.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    I think the biggest detractor for Maualuga was his football intelligence (or lack thereof). He was surrounded by a lot of talent at USC. He tended to freelance a lot, so made some highlight reels. But it seems he lacks the discipline to do "his" job, and possibly BB was wary of his ability to digest the playbook. And we all know BB prefers veterans at LB unless he sees something special in a rookie (like he did with Mayo). Chung seems more fit to grasp the mental aspect of this defense. And he hits like a ton of bricks. Both positions were "need" positions, so I believe that's why they went the route they did. We also need to consider the guys who were on IR last season. The staff got to see them through camp last year, and possibly they believe they can fill their LB needs there. Time will tell if these decisions were good or bad. As for Maualuga, I think he was like Gholston last year. Hyped up by the media, with a lot of highlight footage but not enough substance. As for Tate, he's a flier. Maybe he gets his head out of his azz, maybe not. I suspect he'll be told if he doesn't clean his act up he'll be gone. And probably he starts out on PUP, then gets put on IR unless there is a huge need for his services. I agree that testing positive when you know you're going to be tested is just plain stupid. But I'd bet a year's salary everyone here did a lot of stupid things at 21 years old! I know I sure did. Let's hope the locker room attitude rubs off on him. If he flies straight he could be a huge addition in 2010. My one question would be if they would have taken Larry English at 23 had he still been there. Other than that, I think they did pretty well. They aquired depth at key positions and won't have to shell out any huge contracts. Plus they gained two seconds for next year.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

         Does anybody think that the Patriots appreciably improved their defense, or their OL, from last year? Theres' an article from Jim Donaldson of the Providence Journal on that point (dealing with the defense, only). My feeling is that the OL needs improvement, particularly on the right side: http://www.projo.com/patriots/content/sp_fbn_pats_web_donaldson_29_04-29-09_R0E6OE2_v2.1e9ef0a.html

         While the Patriots secured some decent prospects, they were unable to snare an impact player on either side of the ball.  
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    TexasPat3: Here's my complete analysis of what the Patriots did in the draft: Chung is a great hitter and covers the pass deep you can't ask for more from a FS.Brace is the guy who made Raji look good,in fact as an ardent BC follower I would say that he was the better of the 2 DT's he's a 3 technique 2 gap Defensive Tackle who can slide out to the DE position.Butler will start as the nickelback from day one Deion Sanders says he was the hardest worker at his camp and his career at U-Conn was stellar.Vollmer is the surprise of the entire draft 6'8" 330 lbs of technically sound Offensive Lineman,though none of us ever heard of him Dante loves him!!nuff said.Tate was a pick for the future he was the star of the Tar Heels offense until his knee took a vacation!!He's the guy who will replace Galloway.Ohrnberger is a guy who played well at PSU from what information I could garner he probably won't start right away if ever but he will offer stability at the Guard position and he might make the team as a back-up.Bussey is a guy who needs to work on his pass blocking however his Run blocking technique is very good.The Long Snapper will battle the kid they signed from AZ Hodel for the job but according all I've read he has a hard snap with a tight spiral.Pryor was second team All-SEC projects to be a pass rusher who has a great burst off the line and he is as strong as they come could be a sleeper or practice squad guy.Edelman best contribution might be the fact that fellow Flash Jermail Porter decided to follow him to New England,he's a QB who'll be trying out as a WR/wildcat QB.Jermail Porter is an All-American Wrestler who is 6'6" 315 lbs of lean mean fighting machine!!! He wasn't a draft choice he's an invitee and a true project but if anyone can turn a wrestler into an offensive lineman it would be Dante Scarnecchia!See Stephan Neal....Of the other Free Agent signees Hoyer will get a long look at QB,McClinton will make the pratice squad,Josh Allen who was a Free Agent last year from Troy ST. has been invited back he has a boatload of talent I hope he makes the team...I don't know much about the others...
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

         Here are some opinions on the Patriots' draft:

    1.) Gene Frenette, Jacksonville Union-Times: C-: 
    Bill Belichick was the draft's big wheeler-dealer with seven trades, which he parlayed into four second-round picks. Except for CB Darius Butler, who could emerge as their top cover guy, DT Ron Brace, S Patrick Chung and OT Sebastian Vollmer aren't regarded as sure first-day selections.

    2.) Rick Gosselin, Dallas Morning News: C: 
    The Patriots had the best second round of the draft. Brace can spell Vince Wilfork at the nose, and Butler and Chung will one day be starters on a Super Bowl contender. Tate could be the grand slam pick of this draft. 

    3.) Larry Weisman, Detroit Free Press: B+:
    New England Patriots: They'll get help from this draft because they maneuvered themselves into 12 picks. Got talented people in numerous positions. S Patrick Chung is strong, has decent size, can pair with Brandon Meriweather. DT Ron Brace is a two-gap devourer of blockers and insurance against Vince Wifork leaving in free agency. WR Brandon Tate may pay dividends in a year or two after knee injury stopped a dynamic season. Could help in return game.  

    4.) Pete Prisco, CBS Sports: B+:
    They added some good players and even added a second-round pick in next year's draft. Bill Belichick gets it. Prisco added that hhe loved the Butler and McKenzie picks.

    5.) NBC Sports (Greg Rosenthal and Aaron Silva of Rotoworld.com): A-:
    Just the Patriots being the Patriots. They made seven trades, drafted 12 players (6 in rounds two-to-three), and acquired two extra second-round picks in next year’s draft. Considering how mediocre this draft was, that was a smart move. As usual, they made some surprising choices, including three offensive linemen and a long snapper...But, they are the best at finding players who fit their system. Their choices were geared towards the future, but cornerback Darius Butler could be a star soon. Dealing away veteran corner Ellis Hobbs was a blow, but he’s wasn’t going to be around in 2010. And this team still needs outside linebacker help.

    6.) Chris Harry, Orlando Sentenial: B+:
    Belichick, after trading out of Round 1, had four second-round choices and took defensive players (S Patrick Chung, DT Ron Brace and CB Darius Butler) with three of them. An aging offensive line will be helped by T Sebastian Vollmer and the receiving corps just may have added a steal in Brandon Tate, whose stock plummeted due to a Harvin-like dope test and offseason knee surgery. Third-rounder Tyrone McKenzie, a linebacker from USF, is going to play in the league a long time. 

    7.) Tony Moss, SportsNetwork.com: C+: 
    The Patriots' move out of the first round was evidence that they weren't desperate for an immediate impact player, and their three second-round picks are proof positive that defensive depth was the priority. Chung, Butler, and Brace all figure to begin their New England careers as backups, and to grow into starting roles if all goes according to plan. Brace might have been a bit of a reach at No. 40 overall, but Butler, who had been evaluated as a first-rounder by many, was something of a steal. The Pats made another Logan Mankins-like move in selecting the virtually unknown Vollmer, a native of Germany who still needs a lot of work. Tate, who tested positive for marijuana at the combine, was an intriguing third-round pick. McKenzie, the last of the first-round picks, is unlikely to advance beyond special teams. The most notable picks of the rest of the Draft for New England might be Ingram, who became the second long-snapper in as many years to merit an NFL draft choice...

    Bottom Line: Looks like Bill Belichick took a number of chances, but it's tough to question the Pats' evaluation abilities at this point.


    8.) Rob Rang, NFLDraftScout.com: B+:
    No one gets better value on draft day than the Patriots, as they masterfully slip down the board, pick up extra picks and then add players who should have been taken earlier. The most immediate impact players for the Patriots from this draft will be back-seven defenders Patrick Chung, Darius Butler and linebacker Tyrone McKenzie. Butler might be the best cover corner in this draft, and Chung and McKenzie are among the year's surest open-field tacklers.   

    9.) Jerry Magee, San Diego Union-Tribune: B: 
    What year are we dealing with here, anyhow? It is 2009, right? From the way Bill Belichick acted, one could have thought it was 2010. Belichick did not seem to think much of this procedure, continually dealing down while collecting choices for 2010.  

    10.) Jerry McDonald, Conta Costa Times: B: 
    Safety Patrick Chung (No. 34) is perfect for Bill Belichick. Defensive tackle Ron Brace (No. 40) will help the run defense. A handful of no-names will be successful no-names because they're in New England. 

    11.) Clifton Brown, SportingNews: B:
    They stockpiled picks for 2010 and still got players who might help them, particularly on defense. Safety Patrick Chung, nose tackle Ron Brace and cornerback Darius Butler will have time to develop. 

    12.)  Steve Serby, NY Post: A: 
    Bill Belichick maneuvered brilliantly out of first round to revamp secondary. NT-DE Ron Brace had Bill Parcells written all over him. 
     
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from pyegian. Show pyegian's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    I find it a little funny that people are mad over BB drafting "no name" offensive lineman over "name" guys that we all grew to know and want due to being hyped up by Mel Kiper and other talking heads.

    I guarantee that Dante Scarnechia has a HUGE role in choosing which offensive lineman the team drafts.  He has an unbelievable track record of taking raw lineman with great physical potential and turning them into starting caliber lineman.

    Last I checked, the Pats have had one of the better lines in the league for a number of years.  I have no doubt that Vollmer will turn out to be a player, and probably a better one than the "name" guys everyone wanted.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]I find it a little funny that people are mad over BB drafting "no name" offensive lineman over "name" guys that we all grew to know and want due to being hyped up by Mel Kiper and other talking heads. I guarantee that Dante Scarnechia has a HUGE role in choosing which offensive lineman the team drafts.  He has an unbelievable track record of taking raw lineman with great physical potential and turning them into starting caliber lineman. Last I checked, the Pats have had one of the better lines in the league for a number of years.  I have no doubt that Vollmer will turn out to be a player, and probably a better one than the "name" guys everyone wanted.
    Posted by pyegian[/QUOTE]

         Vollmer and the rest may become good lineman. But, they're all very raw...and likely not yet ready for prime time. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from pyegian. Show pyegian's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    Tex, exactly.  And they're not needed immediately, as all five starters return.  Therefore, BB and Dante can take a year and develop these raw prospects into better players than the other guys they passed over (Vollmer has huge potential), and prepare them to play in 2010.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]Tex, exactly.  And they're not needed immediately, as all five starters return.  Therefore, BB and Dante can take a year and develop these raw prospects into better players than the other guys they passed over (Vollmer has huge potential), and prepare them to play in 2010.
    Posted by pyegian[/QUOTE]

         Pye:

         Time will tell. But, the right side of the Pats' OL badly needs an upgrade. Nick Kaczur is only a couple of notches above a turnstyle at RT...and Neal is always hurt. The Pats' can't afford to have Tom Brady taking a beating, just after recovering from serious knee surgery.  
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from KyleCleric2. Show KyleCleric2's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]I find it a little funny that people are mad over BB drafting "no name" offensive lineman over "name" guys that we all grew to know and want due to being hyped up by Mel Kiper and other talking heads. I guarantee that Dante Scarnechia has a HUGE role in choosing which offensive lineman the team drafts.  He has an unbelievable track record of taking raw lineman with great physical potential and turning them into starting caliber lineman. Last I checked, the Pats have had one of the better lines in the league for a number of years.  I have no doubt that Vollmer will turn out to be a player, and probably a better one than the "name" guys everyone wanted.
    Posted by pyegian[/QUOTE]

    Scarnecchia goes on his own tours to find and workout offensive linemen. He's in charge of that part of the scouting process.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]Scarnecchia goes on his own tours to find and workout offensive linemen. He's in charge of that part of the scouting process.
    Posted by KyleCleric2[/QUOTE]

         Scarnecchia is a great OL coach. But, his rep as a talent evaluator is certainly on the line after this draft. He got the guys that he hand picked. Now, they had better produce.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    Most pundits agree that the Pats didn't have to go after much this draft.  So let's look at what happened.  We picked up a couple of DBs to help out this year.  The DB field is loaded after FA, this and last years draft.  The pass rush was the other.  The Pats didn't respond because their type of LB wasn't there.  We got two extra 2nd round picks for next year...a plus.  We got several guys that are projects.  We don't need them for next year.  Vollmer, Ohrnberger, Tate and McKenzie can be on practice squads.  Brace can play either DT or DE in the 3-4.  I think this a very solid draft for the Pats.  They helped themselves out not so much for this year but for next.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from pats-fan-2007. Show pats-fan-2007's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    Gary, My take is that Vollmer,Ohrnberger, Tate and McKenzie will make the roster.

    If we realease any of those players, they will certainly get picked up by another team.

    Practive squad is usually for 5th-7th round guys and FA's.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from KyleCleric2. Show KyleCleric2's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]     Scarnecchia is a great OL coach. But, his rep as a talent evaluator is certainly on the line after this draft. He got the guys that he hand picked. Now, they had better produce.
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    Vollmer and Ohrnberger better at least make the team. One's a 2nd round pick and the other came from Hobbs. We need to get good value from that. Bussey doesn't matter that much. All the players from the 5th round and later are ok to be released. 4th round and earlier in this draft are not.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]Vollmer and Ohrnberger better at least make the team. One's a 2nd round pick and the other came from Hobbs. We need to get good value from that. Bussey doesn't matter that much. All the players from the 5th round and later are ok to be released. 4th round and earlier in this draft are not.
    Posted by KyleCleric2[/QUOTE]

         Agreed. The Pats badly need to harvest a bumper crop from this years' selections. Their viability as a SB contender may be at stake.     
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Pats' Draft

    [QUOTE]Gary, My take is that Vollmer, Ohrnberger, Tate and McKenzie will make the roster. If we realease any of those players, they will certainly get picked up by another team. Practive squad is usually for 5th-7th round guys and FA's.
    Posted by pats-fan-2007[/QUOTE]


    Perhaps.  But if the team is loaded why would you pass up on Vollmer let's say for a 7th rounder?  My thinking is that they have to keep everything stocked.  We had a nice selection of players before the draft to make a run at it this year.  It's next year that I'm worried about and therefor would like to see this thing as loaded as can be.  If that means placing some of the guys on the practice squad so be it.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share