Patriots 2008 off season (1 Viewer)

[Banger]

I wouldn't either, Road Warrior, but he is heading to the downside of his career. The article I read showed the Pats' very successful strategy of cutting bait on players who are still playing well but are aging.The example they used that sticks out to me was Lawyer Malloy in 2001, who they ditched after a pro bowl season. But they had a bunch of other examples as well.

If Moss leaves why wouldn't their offense return to that of 2 years ago? He was the difference maker. Ya, Welker was good but I think it was in large part due to teams picking their poison and letting Welker beat them on the small stuff as opposed to Moss on bombs.

 

[Road Warriors]

I wouldn't either, Road Warrior, but he is heading to the downside of his career. The article I read showed the Pats' very successful strategy of cutting bait on players who are still playing well but are aging.The example they used that sticks out to me was Lawyer Malloy in 2001, who they ditched after a pro bowl season. But they had a bunch of other examples as well.

If Moss leaves why wouldn't their offense return to that of 2 years ago? He was the difference maker. Ya, Welker was good but I think it was in large part due to teams picking their poison and letting Welker beat them on the small stuff as opposed to Moss on bombs.

I think it would depend on who was brought in to fill the downfield threat WR position. If it's Reche, they'll go back to what they were 2 years ago, more or less. If its another, more capable option, they'd be somewhere between 2006 production and 2007 production. I'd put Berrian, A. Davis, Porter and Gaffney at the top of the list that would be better than Caldwell in '06. I would think about Patten, Hackett, Henderson as possibly improving the O from 2006. However, since I believe Moss makes the rest of the WR significantly more effective, I think ( based on what I see available in FA ) that signing Moss / Gaffney or similar for the 1/2 spots and leaving Welker in the slot may be the best combination of prodcution to cost.

 

[Gr00vus]

I wouldn't either, Road Warrior, but he is heading to the downside of his career. The article I read showed the Pats' very successful strategy of cutting bait on players who are still playing well but are aging.The example they used that sticks out to me was Lawyer Malloy in 2001, who they ditched after a pro bowl season. But they had a bunch of other examples as well.

If Moss leaves why wouldn't their offense return to that of 2 years ago? He was the difference maker. Ya, Welker was good but I think it was in large part due to teams picking their poison and letting Welker beat them on the small stuff as opposed to Moss on bombs.

I think it would depend on who was brought in to fill the downfield threat WR position. If it's Reche, they'll go back to what they were 2 years ago, more or less. If its another, more capable option, they'd be somewhere between 2006 production and 2007 production. I'd put Berrian, A. Davis, Porter and Gaffney at the top of the list that would be better than Caldwell in '06. I would think about Patten, Hackett, Henderson as possibly improving the O from 2006. However, since I believe Moss makes the rest of the WR significantly more effective, I think ( based on what I see available in FA ) that signing Moss / Gaffney or similar for the 1/2 spots and leaving Welker in the slot may be the best combination of prodcution to cost.

Don't forget trading, the way they acquired Moss last year. Seems like there are a few high profile WR that could be moved this offseason. The going rate seems like a 2nd round pick or so. The question would be if the guy they could trade for would renegotiate their salary ala Moss.

 

[Banger]

I wouldn't either, Road Warrior, but he is heading to the downside of his career. The article I read showed the Pats' very successful strategy of cutting bait on players who are still playing well but are aging.The example they used that sticks out to me was Lawyer Malloy in 2001, who they ditched after a pro bowl season. But they had a bunch of other examples as well.

If Moss leaves why wouldn't their offense return to that of 2 years ago? He was the difference maker. Ya, Welker was good but I think it was in large part due to teams picking their poison and letting Welker beat them on the small stuff as opposed to Moss on bombs.

I think it would depend on who was brought in to fill the downfield threat WR position. If it's Reche, they'll go back to what they were 2 years ago, more or less. If its another, more capable option, they'd be somewhere between 2006 production and 2007 production. I'd put Berrian, A. Davis, Porter and Gaffney at the top of the list that would be better than Caldwell in '06. I would think about Patten, Hackett, Henderson as possibly improving the O from 2006. However, since I believe Moss makes the rest of the WR significantly more effective, I think ( based on what I see available in FA ) that signing Moss / Gaffney or similar for the 1/2 spots and leaving Welker in the slot may be the best combination of prodcution to cost.

It's not only what Moss does for the offense but it allows the offense to make those methodical 8 minute drives to keep that old defense off the field and make the tilts more lopsided which allows the defense to be totally one dimensional. If they start doing 3 and outs, their defense would be much more exposed. It would allow teams to run the ball and wear them down more. I think Moss is their most critical player to resign because he was the single biggest difference that made the offense a good one into one of the BEST OF ALL TIME.

 

[bryan215]

I wouldn't either, Road Warrior, but he is heading to the downside of his career. The article I read showed the Pats' very successful strategy of cutting bait on players who are still playing well but are aging.The example they used that sticks out to me was Lawyer Malloy in 2001, who they ditched after a pro bowl season. But they had a bunch of other examples as well.

If Moss leaves why wouldn't their offense return to that of 2 years ago? He was the difference maker. Ya, Welker was good but I think it was in large part due to teams picking their poison and letting Welker beat them on the small stuff as opposed to Moss on bombs.

I think it would depend on who was brought in to fill the downfield threat WR position. If it's Reche, they'll go back to what they were 2 years ago, more or less. If its another, more capable option, they'd be somewhere between 2006 production and 2007 production. I'd put Berrian, A. Davis, Porter and Gaffney at the top of the list that would be better than Caldwell in '06. I would think about Patten, Hackett, Henderson as possibly improving the O from 2006. However, since I believe Moss makes the rest of the WR significantly more effective, I think ( based on what I see available in FA ) that signing Moss / Gaffney or similar for the 1/2 spots and leaving Welker in the slot may be the best combination of prodcution to cost.

It's not only what Moss does for the offense but it allows the offense to make those methodical 8 minute drives to keep that old defense off the field and make the tilts more lopsided which allows the defense to be totally one dimensional. If they start doing 3 and outs, their defense would be much more exposed. It would allow teams to run the ball and wear them down more. I think Moss is their most critical player to resign because he was the single biggest difference that made the offense a good one into one of the BEST OF ALL TIME.

This is why Moss is so amazing.with 19 seconds left and at teh NYG 30 yard line...if Brady puts 5 more yards on that bomb...Moss catches it and theoretically scores or is tackled down at the 5yard line.This is despite being double covered. There are no other WR's available in FA that can consistently be that big of a game changing threat on just 1 play

 

[Banger]

I wouldn't either, Road Warrior, but he is heading to the downside of his career. The article I read showed the Pats' very successful strategy of cutting bait on players who are still playing well but are aging.The example they used that sticks out to me was Lawyer Malloy in 2001, who they ditched after a pro bowl season. But they had a bunch of other examples as well.

If Moss leaves why wouldn't their offense return to that of 2 years ago? He was the difference maker. Ya, Welker was good but I think it was in large part due to teams picking their poison and letting Welker beat them on the small stuff as opposed to Moss on bombs.

I think it would depend on who was brought in to fill the downfield threat WR position. If it's Reche, they'll go back to what they were 2 years ago, more or less. If its another, more capable option, they'd be somewhere between 2006 production and 2007 production. I'd put Berrian, A. Davis, Porter and Gaffney at the top of the list that would be better than Caldwell in '06. I would think about Patten, Hackett, Henderson as possibly improving the O from 2006. However, since I believe Moss makes the rest of the WR significantly more effective, I think ( based on what I see available in FA ) that signing Moss / Gaffney or similar for the 1/2 spots and leaving Welker in the slot may be the best combination of prodcution to cost.

It's not only what Moss does for the offense but it allows the offense to make those methodical 8 minute drives to keep that old defense off the field and make the tilts more lopsided which allows the defense to be totally one dimensional. If they start doing 3 and outs, their defense would be much more exposed. It would allow teams to run the ball and wear them down more. I think Moss is their most critical player to resign because he was the single biggest difference that made the offense a good one into one of the BEST OF ALL TIME.

This is why Moss is so amazing.with 19 seconds left and at teh NYG 30 yard line...if Brady puts 5 more yards on that bomb...Moss catches it and theoretically scores or is tackled down at the 5yard line.This is despite being double covered. There are no other WR's available in FA that can consistently be that big of a game changing threat on just 1 play

I didn't watch every Pat game so I'm sure I missed it a bunch more times but there were sooo many times in the games that I saw, especially early in the year, where Brady would routinely throw the ball up in double/triple coverage and just let Randy go up and snag it. There's no one in free agency that can do that. His problem was motivation not talent. He was motivated this year and happened to break the single season TD record.Welker is a nice WR but I don't think he'd be nearly as effective if the Pats got a Berrian to line up on the other side. They would still have a good offense but not NEARLY as scary.

 

[Boston]

I see Milloy's name brought up and there was two issues with him. One, he did not have a good year in 2002. If someone can dig up his stats I believe it will back this up pretty quickly. Secondly, BB considered Milloy somewhat of a negative influence. He has a short fuse and was not afraid to be very outspoken with his teammates (both good and bad). That's not what BB wanted from a team leader. In Patriot Reign Michael Holley says that in an evaluation Milloy was labeled as a "negative leader sometimes." At the end of the day he would not have been released if he renegotiated (i.e. took a pay cut) but he refused to and the rest is history.

 

[David Yudkin]

I'd put Berrian, A. Davis, Porter and Gaffney at the top of the list that would be better than Caldwell in '06. I would think about Patten, Hackett, Henderson as possibly improving the O from 2006.

Gaffney was on the 2006 Pats. Davis was there in 05. Patten was there in 04. We know what to expect from these guys on the Pats. And in no way, shape, or form does it come close to Randy Moss' production.IMO, Randy Moss made the offense this year. Take him off this team and 1) you lose his immediate production and 2) you lose the extra production the other guys got by defenses having to double team him all day.The 07 Pats improved by 1200 total yards and 200 total points with Moss on the team. Sure, having Samuel back would be nice, but a replacement CB should not be the predominant ingredient in the defense giving up 1200 more yards and 200 more points should Asante walk.

 

[Road Warriors]

I'd put Berrian, A. Davis, Porter and Gaffney at the top of the list that would be better than Caldwell in '06. I would think about Patten, Hackett, Henderson as possibly improving the O from 2006.

Gaffney was on the 2006 Pats. Davis was there in 05. Patten was there in 04. We know what to expect from these guys on the Pats. And in no way, shape, or form does it come close to Randy Moss' production.IMO, Randy Moss made the offense this year. Take him off this team and 1) you lose his immediate production and 2) you lose the extra production the other guys got by defenses having to double team him all day.The 07 Pats improved by 1200 total yards and 200 total points with Moss on the team. Sure, having Samuel back would be nice, but a replacement CB should not be the predominant ingredient in the defense giving up 1200 more yards and 200 more points should Asante walk.

Agreed it doesn't come close to 2007, but I think it'd be a step up from 2006. The conclusion I draw in the other post is that Moss + any FA WR >>> Top 2 non-Moss FA, both in top end production and cost/value, effectively by boosting the other WR production with his presence.Gaffney was just coming online at the end of the year and into the playoffs. Davis was behind Branch and Givens. Patten was the 3rd WR behind Branch/Givens, also, and outperformed Caldwell.The primary point is that losing Moss doesn't necessarily drop you back to 2006 production, but it will be far less productive than the 2007 offense. I was naming some of the FA that would be, IMO, better than Reche Caldwell as a WR1 in this offense.

 

[Thumper]

I'd put Berrian, A. Davis, Porter and Gaffney at the top of the list that would be better than Caldwell in '06. I would think about Patten, Hackett, Henderson as possibly improving the O from 2006.

Gaffney was on the 2006 Pats. Davis was there in 05. Patten was there in 04. We know what to expect from these guys on the Pats. And in no way, shape, or form does it come close to Randy Moss' production.IMO, Randy Moss made the offense this year. Take him off this team and 1) you lose his immediate production and 2) you lose the extra production the other guys got by defenses having to double team him all day.The 07 Pats improved by 1200 total yards and 200 total points with Moss on the team. Sure, having Samuel back would be nice, but a replacement CB should not be the predominant ingredient in the defense giving up 1200 more yards and 200 more points should Asante walk.

Agreed it doesn't come close to 2007, but I think it'd be a step up from 2006. The conclusion I draw in the other post is that Moss + any FA WR >>> Top 2 non-Moss FA, both in top end production and cost/value, effectively by boosting the other WR production with his presence.Gaffney was just coming online at the end of the year and into the playoffs. Davis was behind Branch and Givens. Patten was the 3rd WR behind Branch/Givens, also, and outperformed Caldwell.The primary point is that losing Moss doesn't necessarily drop you back to 2006 production, but it will be far less productive than the 2007 offense. I was naming some of the FA that would be, IMO, better than Reche Caldwell as a WR1 in this offense.

The Patriots will put the franchise tag on Moss.The key to the off season will be how are they going to upgrade their defense.

 

[nerangers]

Moss gets the Franchise Tag...I don't see them using it for anyone else. The question is how well would Moss respond to that? We saw how it worked out last year with tagging Samuel.

I don't think Moss has a super bowl ring, and was three minutes away from getting one. I think he would like to stay with a team that gives him a shot at one.

Now Samuel has his rings, so going for the money makes sense. I like what David said about what you could get for the cost of acquiring Samuel.

Patriot Perfection Goes Kaput, Now What? - this article addressed a lot of the re-tooling the Patriots need to do this off-season, and the status of many of the players.

 

[Pat Patriot]

I'm not sure why we keep seeing Rodney Harrison lumped in with Bruschi and Seau as potential retirees. I havent seen anything out of Harrison that indicates he wants to retire. Harrison had fairly good health this year and despite being out-fought by Tyree for that pass, he had a good SB. He had 12 tackles. He's no longer the All Pro he once was but is still a good starting safety in the NFL. I fully expect him to be back next year.

 

[Boston]

Moss gets the Franchise Tag...I don't see them using it for anyone else. The question is how well would Moss respond to that? We saw how it worked out last year with tagging Samuel.

I don't think Moss has a super bowl ring, and was three minutes away from getting one. I think he would like to stay with a team that gives him a shot at one.

Now Samuel has his rings, so going for the money makes sense. I like what David said about what you could get for the cost of acquiring Samuel.

Patriot Perfection Goes Kaput, Now What? - this article addressed a lot of the re-tooling the Patriots need to do this off-season, and the status of many of the players.

Felger said he spoke with Jeremy Green (Denny Green's son who was a front office guy and is now on the mediaside) who knows Moss well about this. He said Moss won't have any issues with getting franchised and he actually said he would not be surprised if the Pats franchise him two years in a row. The thinking is this will avoid making a long term committment to Moss but still allows Moss to earn almost 20 mil which he will be cool with. I don't have a link to this (and obviously it's speculation) because it was said on the radio.

 

[Banger]

I'm not sure why we keep seeing Rodney Harrison lumped in with Bruschi and Seau as potential retirees. I havent seen anything out of Harrison that indicates he wants to retire. Harrison had fairly good health this year and despite being out-fought by Tyree for that pass, he had a good SB. He had 12 tackles. He's no longer the All Pro he once was but is still a good starting safety in the NFL. I fully expect him to be back next year.

He also got beat by Boss on that 40 yarder.

 

[The Moz]

Didn't the Pats win a superbowl w/o anyhting for CB's in 04 ?

 

[nerangers]

This just took me by surprise...on a scale of one to ten, Asante thinks his coming back is a 10? Am I misreading something? There is no way the Pats shell out 80 Million on one player.

Samuel expects to return to Patriots

Asante Samuel said "it's gonna take a lot" to keep him a Patriot. But the 27-year-old unrestricted free agent cornerback, who has spent his five-year career in New England, added that on a scale of 1 to 10, he'd probably rate his chances of coming back a 10. "The fans love me and I love them back," he said. "The organization loves me and, hopefully, we can work it out." Samuel had six interceptions during the regular season and has 22 in his career. He's returned three for touchdowns. "It's gonna take a lot to make me happy and my family happy," said the first-time Pro Bowler after an AFC practice session at Kapolei High Wednesday. Samuel is one of six Patriots who will play in the all-star game Sunday at Aloha Stadium. Asked how much he thinks he's worth, Samuel threw the question back at his interviewer: "You take a guess and see if you can hit it. It's no secret I'm looking for a big, huge, blockbuster deal." Samuel's agent, Alonzo Shavers, is also in Hawaii and said he won't begin talking with the Patriots until after the Pro Bowl. -- Boston Globe

 

[nerangers]

Pats Cap Numbers: when accounting for the top 51 Patriots players under contract for 2008, the Patriots have $8.365 million in space under the $116 million cap. That currently ranks 25th out of the league's 32 teams.

Definitely not the flexibility as last year. Anyone know how Moss' numbers fit into this? To franchise him, you need $7.84m

 

[Road Warriors]

Pats Cap Numbers: when accounting for the top 51 Patriots players under contract for 2008, the Patriots have $8.365 million in space under the $116 million cap. That currently ranks 25th out of the league's 32 teams.

Definitely not the flexibility as last year. Anyone know how Moss' numbers fit into this? To franchise him, you need $7.84m

I thought they only had 41 under contract for next year. Moss has no numbers in this figure. Nor does Samuel. They'll have a bunch of cuts/restructures to do before the draft, I imagine.

 

[brednbuddah]

Pats Cap Numbers: when accounting for the top 51 Patriots players under contract for 2008, the Patriots have $8.365 million in space under the $116 million cap. That currently ranks 25th out of the league's 32 teams.

Definitely not the flexibility as last year. Anyone know how Moss' numbers fit into this? To franchise him, you need $7.84m

I thought they only had 41 under contract for next year. Moss has no numbers in this figure. Nor does Samuel. They'll have a bunch of cuts/restructures to do before the draft, I imagine.

cuts - seau, vrabel?restructure - harrison, bruschi, faulk, gaffney?

how much does a #7 over all pick hit the cap?

 

[Boston]

Pats Cap Numbers: when accounting for the top 51 Patriots players under contract for 2008, the Patriots have $8.365 million in space under the $116 million cap. That currently ranks 25th out of the league's 32 teams.

Definitely not the flexibility as last year. Anyone know how Moss' numbers fit into this? To franchise him, you need $7.84m

I thought they only had 41 under contract for next year. Moss has no numbers in this figure. Nor does Samuel. They'll have a bunch of cuts/restructures to do before the draft, I imagine.

cuts - seau, vrabel?restructure - harrison, bruschi, faulk, gaffney?

how much does a #7 over all pick hit the cap?

Seau, Gaffney and Bruschi are free agents and if they resign (or don't retire) it won't be for too much money...and there's zero chance of Vrabel getting cut.

 

[Road Warriors]

Pats Cap Numbers: when accounting for the top 51 Patriots players under contract for 2008, the Patriots have $8.365 million in space under the $116 million cap. That currently ranks 25th out of the league's 32 teams.

Definitely not the flexibility as last year. Anyone know how Moss' numbers fit into this? To franchise him, you need $7.84m

I thought they only had 41 under contract for next year. Moss has no numbers in this figure. Nor does Samuel. They'll have a bunch of cuts/restructures to do before the draft, I imagine.

cuts - seau, vrabel?restructure - harrison, bruschi, faulk, gaffney?

how much does a #7 over all pick hit the cap?

Cut - Stallworth ( may restruct, but due 11mill next year with a roster bonus )Cut/restruct - Colvin ( maybe ), Faulk, Eckel ( 5.4m? according to patscap.com ), Washington

Bruschi, Gaffney, Seau are all UFA, but could resign farily cheap.

Yudkin has a decent write up on page 1. Something like 25 mill to play after a few moves.

 

[David Yudkin]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

 

[brednbuddah]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

a) agreed. they could get so much more for him now than later.b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

 

[David Yudkin]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

a) agreed. they could get so much more for him now than later.b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

No way they take a LB at #7. BB loves seasoned LBers and any rookie would get paid a fortune to take several years to learn the system . . . something they would never want to shell out the time and money for. They have not drafted LBers very high in the past, have taken hybrid type players in later on to try to groom them, and have lived with 30 year old LBers for years. I doubt that changes now.

 

[brednbuddah]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

a) agreed. they could get so much more for him now than later.b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

No way they take a LB at #7. BB loves seasoned LBers and any rookie would get paid a fortune to take several years to learn the system . . . something they would never want to shell out the time and money for. They have not drafted LBers very high in the past, have taken hybrid type players in later on to try to groom them, and have lived with 30 year old LBers for years. I doubt that changes now.

ok. I may be biased here. but Ed Harris (07 2nd rnd draft pick, Michigan) came in when Vilma went down and lead the team in tackles after that point and has been nothing, but a disruption when he wasn't making tackles. My point, the LB position is the key to the D, but doesn't take years to develop if you find the right guy for your system.

 

[Boston]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

I'd be very surprised if they go in that direction. On the surface a young LB makes perfect sense. They need reinforcements at that position. Yet, in the eight years since BB has run the show he has drafted very few LBs and the highest he has selected one is in the fifth round. The only player drafted in the BB era who has contributed at LB is Tully Banta Cain and they got him in the seventh round. He was also a Dlineman in college as was Vrabel, Bruschi, McGinest and Colvin (and I think Thomas but I'm not sure about that). Playing LB for the Pats is very difficult. BB wants his LBs to weigh no less than 240 (and that's light) and preferably in the 255-260 ballpark. They need to be intelligent, play the run and pass equally well and having some experience in a 3-4 wouldn't hurt (and there's not too many college programs that run a 3-4). When you look at that criteria there's very few college kids who have the ability to handle that role coming directly into the NFL. Chad Brown (wo was washed up physically) came to the Pats and not only had 3-4 experience but had made Pro Bowls in that style of D and he said he was completely lost in the Pats system. To think a college kid can hit the ground running maybe asking too much.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Pats acquire a young stud at LB. They could definetly use the athleticism there. Yet, at the end of the day I'll believe they'll take one early when I see it.

 

[brednbuddah]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

I'd be very surprised if they go in that direction. On the surface a young LB makes perfect sense. They need reinforcements at that position. Yet, in the eight years since BB has run the show he has drafted very few LBs and the highest he has selected one is in the fifth round. The only player drafted in the BB era who has contributed at LB is Tully Banta Cain and they got him in the seventh round. He was also a Dlineman in college as was Vrabel, Bruschi, McGinest and Colvin (and I think Thomas but I'm not sure about that). Playing LB for the Pats is very difficult. BB wants his LBs to weigh no less than 240 (and that's light) and preferably in the 255-260 ballpark. They need to be intelligent, play the run and pass equally well and having some experience in a 3-4 wouldn't hurt (and there's not too many college programs that run a 3-4). When you look at that criteria there's very few college kids who have the ability to handle that role coming directly into the NFL. Chad Brown (wo was washed up physically) came to the Pats and not only had 3-4 experience but had made Pro Bowls in that style of D and he said he was completely lost in the Pats system. To think a college kid can hit the ground running maybe asking too much.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Pats acquire a young stud at LB. They could definetly use the athleticism there. Yet, at the end of the day I'll believe they'll take one early when I see it.

nice lesson. didn't know. ok, so who do they use the #7 pick on?

 

[David Yudkin]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

I'd be very surprised if they go in that direction. On the surface a young LB makes perfect sense. They need reinforcements at that position. Yet, in the eight years since BB has run the show he has drafted very few LBs and the highest he has selected one is in the fifth round. The only player drafted in the BB era who has contributed at LB is Tully Banta Cain and they got him in the seventh round. He was also a Dlineman in college as was Vrabel, Bruschi, McGinest and Colvin (and I think Thomas but I'm not sure about that). Playing LB for the Pats is very difficult. BB wants his LBs to weigh no less than 240 (and that's light) and preferably in the 255-260 ballpark. They need to be intelligent, play the run and pass equally well and having some experience in a 3-4 wouldn't hurt (and there's not too many college programs that run a 3-4). When you look at that criteria there's very few college kids who have the ability to handle that role coming directly into the NFL. Chad Brown (wo was washed up physically) came to the Pats and not only had 3-4 experience but had made Pro Bowls in that style of D and he said he was completely lost in the Pats system. To think a college kid can hit the ground running maybe asking too much.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Pats acquire a young stud at LB. They could definetly use the athleticism there. Yet, at the end of the day I'll believe they'll take one early when I see it.

nice lesson. didn't know. ok, so who do they use the #7 pick on?

IMO, th e likely options include trading down, taking a CB, or taking DL or OL help.

 

[Road Warriors]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

I'd be very surprised if they go in that direction. On the surface a young LB makes perfect sense. They need reinforcements at that position. Yet, in the eight years since BB has run the show he has drafted very few LBs and the highest he has selected one is in the fifth round. The only player drafted in the BB era who has contributed at LB is Tully Banta Cain and they got him in the seventh round. He was also a Dlineman in college as was Vrabel, Bruschi, McGinest and Colvin (and I think Thomas but I'm not sure about that). Playing LB for the Pats is very difficult. BB wants his LBs to weigh no less than 240 (and that's light) and preferably in the 255-260 ballpark. They need to be intelligent, play the run and pass equally well and having some experience in a 3-4 wouldn't hurt (and there's not too many college programs that run a 3-4). When you look at that criteria there's very few college kids who have the ability to handle that role coming directly into the NFL. Chad Brown (wo was washed up physically) came to the Pats and not only had 3-4 experience but had made Pro Bowls in that style of D and he said he was completely lost in the Pats system. To think a college kid can hit the ground running maybe asking too much.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Pats acquire a young stud at LB. They could definetly use the athleticism there. Yet, at the end of the day I'll believe they'll take one early when I see it.

I see lots of mocks have Gohlston (sic?) going to the Pats in the 7 slot. He'd be similar to others mentioned as a smallish DE that could play OLB in a 3-4. I haven't seen enough of him to know if he looks like he could be groomed for the spot, but at the 7 spot, and the cap $ you'd need for him, I'm not sure you can "groom" him. If there is an impact OL, DL, or CB at the 7 spot ( in no particular order ) I'd expect them to go that route and use FA to fill the LB spots.

 

[Boston]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

I'd be very surprised if they go in that direction. On the surface a young LB makes perfect sense. They need reinforcements at that position. Yet, in the eight years since BB has run the show he has drafted very few LBs and the highest he has selected one is in the fifth round. The only player drafted in the BB era who has contributed at LB is Tully Banta Cain and they got him in the seventh round. He was also a Dlineman in college as was Vrabel, Bruschi, McGinest and Colvin (and I think Thomas but I'm not sure about that). Playing LB for the Pats is very difficult. BB wants his LBs to weigh no less than 240 (and that's light) and preferably in the 255-260 ballpark. They need to be intelligent, play the run and pass equally well and having some experience in a 3-4 wouldn't hurt (and there's not too many college programs that run a 3-4). When you look at that criteria there's very few college kids who have the ability to handle that role coming directly into the NFL. Chad Brown (wo was washed up physically) came to the Pats and not only had 3-4 experience but had made Pro Bowls in that style of D and he said he was completely lost in the Pats system. To think a college kid can hit the ground running maybe asking too much.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Pats acquire a young stud at LB. They could definetly use the athleticism there. Yet, at the end of the day I'll believe they'll take one early when I see it.

nice lesson. didn't know. ok, so who do they use the #7 pick on?

I agree with Mr. Yudkin. Obviously things could change once free agent hits and if Asante Samuel surprised everyone and resigned. If he doesn't than CB's a big need because there's very little there. DL and OL are always in play with the Pats as well. RT is an area that could be improved yet I really hope this pick, whether it's taken or dealt for other picks translates into defensive help. The Pats could use a nice jolt of young legs to their D.My darkhorse idea is they deal that pick for a proven veteran. Someone who has proven himself and would have the ability to make an immediate impact. This team is very close and adding a few more quality players could get them over the top. I'm not sure if a deal could be worked out but my guess is the Pats would rather spend the type of money that the #7 pick gets on a proven commodity as opposed to a rookie..

 

[Road Warriors]

...I agree with Mr. Yudkin. Obviously things could change once free agent hits and if Asante Samuel surprised everyone and resigned. If he doesn't than CB's a big need because there's very little there. DL and OL are always in play with the Pats as well. RT is an area that could be improved yet I really hope this pick, whether it's taken or dealt for other picks translates into defensive help. The Pats could use a nice jolt of young legs to their D.My darkhorse idea is they deal that pick for a proven veteran. Someone who has proven himself and would have the ability to make an immediate impact. This team is very close and adding a few more quality players could get them over the top. I'm not sure if a deal could be worked out but my guess is the Pats would rather spend the type of money that the #7 pick gets on a proven commodity as opposed to a rookie..

To be honest, I don't see many trade options that would demand a high 1st. Those picks are gold. What type of player that could be available in trade would come at the cost of the #7 pick? Is there an impact LB with a small enough cap hit that would be worth the 7? I agree, in principle, that what you say is dead on. They'd rather have a proven commodity for the cap $ the #7 will demand in terms of value, but I just can't see a trade that would work for cap room and value, unless it involved a later 1st or maybe early 2nd. Players are not usually reasonably valued vs. draft picks, IMO ( see Moss = 4th rounder )

 

[Boston]

Given the landscape at LB, I am beginning to think that NE will have to keep Colvin for his final year of his contract even if he doesn't restructure. They are already thin at the position. However, he is at the age where they normally don't want to start signing people to big money, multi-year deals, so I am not sure they will really try hard to get him signed longer term.

I'm beginning to wonder if the team might be best served to let Samuel walk and go on to some form of Plan B. I like Samuel as much as the next guy, but I think his value is higher on the Pats than it may be on another team. Put him on a so-so defense (with a fat contract) and I am not so sure he is an All Pro CB. Top 10, sure, Top 1 or 2 . . . not as sure.

If they did let Asante walk, they could probably afford Nnamdi Asomugha or Marcus Trufant AND a top LB like Briggs or Suggs (or maybe one of the ARI guys)for the same total cost (or thereabouts).

So in theory, they could have a secondary of Harrison, Meriweather, Gay (if they re-sign him), Hobbs, a free agent CB, and whomever they take in the draft. Logic would seem to indicate that NE would take someone like Michael Jenkins in the draft . . . but we all know that they are hard to pin down on a specific draft pick. With the starting DL intact and some upgrading at LB, I think that would be a decent unit.

I don't see how they could afford to keep Samuel and Moss, and I think it would be easier (and more prudent) to keep Moss. I think they could swing keeping Moss, adding an impact LB, and drafting and signing CBs.

While it is probably unliekly, imagine a LB corps of Thomas, Briggs, Colvin, and Vrabel with Seau and/or Bruschi subbing in.

b) their once great strength seems pretty old all of a sudden. These Ds are predicated on the linebacker. I don't see them using that #7 pick on anything but a linebacker.

I'd be very surprised if they go in that direction. On the surface a young LB makes perfect sense. They need reinforcements at that position. Yet, in the eight years since BB has run the show he has drafted very few LBs and the highest he has selected one is in the fifth round. The only player drafted in the BB era who has contributed at LB is Tully Banta Cain and they got him in the seventh round. He was also a Dlineman in college as was Vrabel, Bruschi, McGinest and Colvin (and I think Thomas but I'm not sure about that). Playing LB for the Pats is very difficult. BB wants his LBs to weigh no less than 240 (and that's light) and preferably in the 255-260 ballpark. They need to be intelligent, play the run and pass equally well and having some experience in a 3-4 wouldn't hurt (and there's not too many college programs that run a 3-4). When you look at that criteria there's very few college kids who have the ability to handle that role coming directly into the NFL. Chad Brown (wo was washed up physically) came to the Pats and not only had 3-4 experience but had made Pro Bowls in that style of D and he said he was completely lost in the Pats system. To think a college kid can hit the ground running maybe asking too much.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Pats acquire a young stud at LB. They could definetly use the athleticism there. Yet, at the end of the day I'll believe they'll take one early when I see it.

I see lots of mocks have Gohlston (sic?) going to the Pats in the 7 slot. He'd be similar to others mentioned as a smallish DE that could play OLB in a 3-4. I haven't seen enough of him to know if he looks like he could be groomed for the spot, but at the 7 spot, and the cap $ you'd need for him, I'm not sure you can "groom" him. If there is an impact OL, DL, or CB at the 7 spot ( in no particular order ) I'd expect them to go that route and use FA to fill the LB spots.

One think that is pretty constant this time of year is the mocks will project LB to the Pats because on paper it makes sense. Yet, it never sems to comes to fruition. I really thought they were going to nab Beason last year...and wish they did because it looks like Carolina got a steal there. There was a lot of talk that the Pats were focusing on him but they passed on him for Merriweather and that looks like one they may regret.Agreed about the grooming. For that type of money you can't afford too much room for error. That would be a costly mistake...or body on the bench.

 

[David Yudkin]

...I agree with Mr. Yudkin. Obviously things could change once free agent hits and if Asante Samuel surprised everyone and resigned. If he doesn't than CB's a big need because there's very little there. DL and OL are always in play with the Pats as well. RT is an area that could be improved yet I really hope this pick, whether it's taken or dealt for other picks translates into defensive help. The Pats could use a nice jolt of young legs to their D.My darkhorse idea is they deal that pick for a proven veteran. Someone who has proven himself and would have the ability to make an immediate impact. This team is very close and adding a few more quality players could get them over the top. I'm not sure if a deal could be worked out but my guess is the Pats would rather spend the type of money that the #7 pick gets on a proven commodity as opposed to a rookie..

To be honest, I don't see many trade options that would demand a high 1st. Those picks are gold. What type of player that could be available in trade would come at the cost of the #7 pick? Is there an impact LB with a small enough cap hit that would be worth the 7? I agree, in principle, that what you say is dead on. They'd rather have a proven commodity for the cap $ the #7 will demand in terms of value, but I just can't see a trade that would work for cap room and value, unless it involved a later 1st or maybe early 2nd. Players are not usually reasonably valued vs. draft picks, IMO ( see Moss = 4th rounder )

Value of players and draft picks make no sense IMO. Welker = 2nd + 7th but Moss = 4th? AJ Feeley = 2nd? WHo knows what someone would give up for the #7 pick.As far as a cap hit, the Pats would likely make out better in trading the #7 pick. Whoever gets that pick will have to pick up the salary of the pick. They also will have to eat the salary cap hit of the player they would be trading. The Pats would only have to deal with whatever salary the player has. Since the other team will have to essentially payout way more money, that's another obstacle in trying to broker a trade.

 

[Boston]

...I agree with Mr. Yudkin. Obviously things could change once free agent hits and if Asante Samuel surprised everyone and resigned. If he doesn't than CB's a big need because there's very little there. DL and OL are always in play with the Pats as well. RT is an area that could be improved yet I really hope this pick, whether it's taken or dealt for other picks translates into defensive help. The Pats could use a nice jolt of young legs to their D.My darkhorse idea is they deal that pick for a proven veteran. Someone who has proven himself and would have the ability to make an immediate impact. This team is very close and adding a few more quality players could get them over the top. I'm not sure if a deal could be worked out but my guess is the Pats would rather spend the type of money that the #7 pick gets on a proven commodity as opposed to a rookie..

To be honest, I don't see many trade options that would demand a high 1st. Those picks are gold. What type of player that could be available in trade would come at the cost of the #7 pick? Is there an impact LB with a small enough cap hit that would be worth the 7? I agree, in principle, that what you say is dead on. They'd rather have a proven commodity for the cap $ the #7 will demand in terms of value, but I just can't see a trade that would work for cap room and value, unless it involved a later 1st or maybe early 2nd. Players are not usually reasonably valued vs. draft picks, IMO ( see Moss = 4th rounder )

It would be really tough and as you say it probably wouldn't be a straight up deal. IMO the best way to see if there are any players that fit this profile is too look at the bottomfeeders that maybe looking to get younger. Do they have a player that's around 29-30 years old that they maybe willing to deal that could also make a big impact for the Pats. Obviously we're looking at a very small group of players and it may not make sense. Yet, it would not surprise me to see them do something (i.e. acquire by dealing draft picks) that ends up netting them immediate veteran like they did with Moss, Welker, Dillon and Washington (and tried to do with Starks but failed miseably).

 

[Boston]

...I agree with Mr. Yudkin. Obviously things could change once free agent hits and if Asante Samuel surprised everyone and resigned. If he doesn't than CB's a big need because there's very little there. DL and OL are always in play with the Pats as well. RT is an area that could be improved yet I really hope this pick, whether it's taken or dealt for other picks translates into defensive help. The Pats could use a nice jolt of young legs to their D.My darkhorse idea is they deal that pick for a proven veteran. Someone who has proven himself and would have the ability to make an immediate impact. This team is very close and adding a few more quality players could get them over the top. I'm not sure if a deal could be worked out but my guess is the Pats would rather spend the type of money that the #7 pick gets on a proven commodity as opposed to a rookie..

To be honest, I don't see many trade options that would demand a high 1st. Those picks are gold. What type of player that could be available in trade would come at the cost of the #7 pick? Is there an impact LB with a small enough cap hit that would be worth the 7? I agree, in principle, that what you say is dead on. They'd rather have a proven commodity for the cap $ the #7 will demand in terms of value, but I just can't see a trade that would work for cap room and value, unless it involved a later 1st or maybe early 2nd. Players are not usually reasonably valued vs. draft picks, IMO ( see Moss = 4th rounder )

Value of players and draft picks make no sense IMO. Welker = 2nd + 7th but Moss = 4th? AJ Feeley = 2nd? WHo knows what someone would give up for the #7 pick.As far as a cap hit, the Pats would likely make out better in trading the #7 pick. Whoever gets that pick will have to pick up the salary of the pick. They also will have to eat the salary cap hit of the player they would be trading. The Pats would only have to deal with whatever salary the player has. Since the other team will have to essentially payout way more money, that's another obstacle in trying to broker a trade.

Yeah, that is a huge stumbling block. That's why you'd probably need to deal with a team that sees itself at least two years away from being competitive.

 

[Road Warriors]

...I agree with Mr. Yudkin. Obviously things could change once free agent hits and if Asante Samuel surprised everyone and resigned. If he doesn't than CB's a big need because there's very little there. DL and OL are always in play with the Pats as well. RT is an area that could be improved yet I really hope this pick, whether it's taken or dealt for other picks translates into defensive help. The Pats could use a nice jolt of young legs to their D.My darkhorse idea is they deal that pick for a proven veteran. Someone who has proven himself and would have the ability to make an immediate impact. This team is very close and adding a few more quality players could get them over the top. I'm not sure if a deal could be worked out but my guess is the Pats would rather spend the type of money that the #7 pick gets on a proven commodity as opposed to a rookie..

To be honest, I don't see many trade options that would demand a high 1st. Those picks are gold. What type of player that could be available in trade would come at the cost of the #7 pick? Is there an impact LB with a small enough cap hit that would be worth the 7? I agree, in principle, that what you say is dead on. They'd rather have a proven commodity for the cap $ the #7 will demand in terms of value, but I just can't see a trade that would work for cap room and value, unless it involved a later 1st or maybe early 2nd. Players are not usually reasonably valued vs. draft picks, IMO ( see Moss = 4th rounder )

Value of players and draft picks make no sense IMO. Welker = 2nd + 7th but Moss = 4th? AJ Feeley = 2nd? WHo knows what someone would give up for the #7 pick.As far as a cap hit, the Pats would likely make out better in trading the #7 pick. Whoever gets that pick will have to pick up the salary of the pick. They also will have to eat the salary cap hit of the player they would be trading. The Pats would only have to deal with whatever salary the player has. Since the other team will have to essentially payout way more money, that's another obstacle in trying to broker a trade.

True, I wasn't clear in the earlier comment. I can't picture a scenario where a team could trade a player with enough value for the #7 and still absorb the cap hit of the player traded along with the cap hit of the #7 pick... unless the player traded had a very small cap # with the original team. I'd love to see the Pats find a trading partner with a young Vrabel type.... quality player on the bench, small cap #... and use the pick to acquire that player along with 1 or more lower or future picks. Assuming they use the pick this year, who do you see them taking?

 

[David Yudkin]

...I agree with Mr. Yudkin. Obviously things could change once free agent hits and if Asante Samuel surprised everyone and resigned. If he doesn't than CB's a big need because there's very little there. DL and OL are always in play with the Pats as well. RT is an area that could be improved yet I really hope this pick, whether it's taken or dealt for other picks translates into defensive help. The Pats could use a nice jolt of young legs to their D.My darkhorse idea is they deal that pick for a proven veteran. Someone who has proven himself and would have the ability to make an immediate impact. This team is very close and adding a few more quality players could get them over the top. I'm not sure if a deal could be worked out but my guess is the Pats would rather spend the type of money that the #7 pick gets on a proven commodity as opposed to a rookie..

To be honest, I don't see many trade options that would demand a high 1st. Those picks are gold. What type of player that could be available in trade would come at the cost of the #7 pick? Is there an impact LB with a small enough cap hit that would be worth the 7? I agree, in principle, that what you say is dead on. They'd rather have a proven commodity for the cap $ the #7 will demand in terms of value, but I just can't see a trade that would work for cap room and value, unless it involved a later 1st or maybe early 2nd. Players are not usually reasonably valued vs. draft picks, IMO ( see Moss = 4th rounder )

Value of players and draft picks make no sense IMO. Welker = 2nd + 7th but Moss = 4th? AJ Feeley = 2nd? WHo knows what someone would give up for the #7 pick.As far as a cap hit, the Pats would likely make out better in trading the #7 pick. Whoever gets that pick will have to pick up the salary of the pick. They also will have to eat the salary cap hit of the player they would be trading. The Pats would only have to deal with whatever salary the player has. Since the other team will have to essentially payout way more money, that's another obstacle in trying to broker a trade.

True, I wasn't clear in the earlier comment. I can't picture a scenario where a team could trade a player with enough value for the #7 and still absorb the cap hit of the player traded along with the cap hit of the #7 pick... unless the player traded had a very small cap # with the original team. I'd love to see the Pats find a trading partner with a young Vrabel type.... quality player on the bench, small cap #... and use the pick to acquire that player along with 1 or more lower or future picks. Assuming they use the pick this year, who do you see them taking?

This year in particular there are so many domnoes that will fall by the time they get to draft day that at this point it will be hard to tell. We need to know what happens with Moss and Samuel as well as which LBers will be back.As I outlined in this thread or the other one, I think Moss is the toughest guy to replace so they will keep him. They likely can't also afford Samuel, so they would need CB help. At that point I suggested they take one of the other decent FA CB, sign a decent experienced LB, and draft a top CB with the #7 pick. IMO, that would improve the defense and leave the offense pretty much alone (although without Stallworth).

 

[Road Warriors]

...I agree with Mr. Yudkin. Obviously things could change once free agent hits and if Asante Samuel surprised everyone and resigned. If he doesn't than CB's a big need because there's very little there. DL and OL are always in play with the Pats as well. RT is an area that could be improved yet I really hope this pick, whether it's taken or dealt for other picks translates into defensive help. The Pats could use a nice jolt of young legs to their D.My darkhorse idea is they deal that pick for a proven veteran. Someone who has proven himself and would have the ability to make an immediate impact. This team is very close and adding a few more quality players could get them over the top. I'm not sure if a deal could be worked out but my guess is the Pats would rather spend the type of money that the #7 pick gets on a proven commodity as opposed to a rookie..

To be honest, I don't see many trade options that would demand a high 1st. Those picks are gold. What type of player that could be available in trade would come at the cost of the #7 pick? Is there an impact LB with a small enough cap hit that would be worth the 7? I agree, in principle, that what you say is dead on. They'd rather have a proven commodity for the cap $ the #7 will demand in terms of value, but I just can't see a trade that would work for cap room and value, unless it involved a later 1st or maybe early 2nd. Players are not usually reasonably valued vs. draft picks, IMO ( see Moss = 4th rounder )

Value of players and draft picks make no sense IMO. Welker = 2nd + 7th but Moss = 4th? AJ Feeley = 2nd? WHo knows what someone would give up for the #7 pick.As far as a cap hit, the Pats would likely make out better in trading the #7 pick. Whoever gets that pick will have to pick up the salary of the pick. They also will have to eat the salary cap hit of the player they would be trading. The Pats would only have to deal with whatever salary the player has. Since the other team will have to essentially payout way more money, that's another obstacle in trying to broker a trade.

True, I wasn't clear in the earlier comment. I can't picture a scenario where a team could trade a player with enough value for the #7 and still absorb the cap hit of the player traded along with the cap hit of the #7 pick... unless the player traded had a very small cap # with the original team. I'd love to see the Pats find a trading partner with a young Vrabel type.... quality player on the bench, small cap #... and use the pick to acquire that player along with 1 or more lower or future picks. Assuming they use the pick this year, who do you see them taking?

This year in particular there are so many domnoes that will fall by the time they get to draft day that at this point it will be hard to tell. We need to know what happens with Moss and Samuel as well as which LBers will be back.As I outlined in this thread or the other one, I think Moss is the toughest guy to replace so they will keep him. They likely can't also afford Samuel, so they would need CB help. At that point I suggested they take one of the other decent FA CB, sign a decent experienced LB, and draft a top CB with the #7 pick. IMO, that would improve the defense and leave the offense pretty much alone (although without Stallworth).

It is going to be one of the more interesting offseasons, thats for sure. They will need help in the defensive backfield, and if they can get a cover corner from the 7 pick, that can play at least nickel for them, I think that'd be a win. I'm not versed enough in the incoming draft class to determine if the top CB is "worth" the 7 pick. I'd love to find a draft pick trading partner to move down, but I fear thats a popular sentiment among teams. And I fully agree that they need to resign Moss. I expect Stallworth to be gone, but I'd like to retain Gaffney for the role of #2 opposite Moss & keep Welker coming out of the slot. IMO, Gaffney/Jackson will be cheaper than 2007 Stallworth/Gaffney and as productive.

 

[Boston]

Guys-I don't think they ever would but does anyone think they would go to a more traditional 4-3 as their base D? The reason I ask this is if you look at their front 7 personnel on paper right now they'd be in much better shape heading into this offseason if they went to a 4-3. Assuming they kept Colvin they'd have seven starting caliber defenders in Seymour, Wilfork, Warren, Jarvis, Colvin, Vrabel and Thomas. They could than use the #7 pick on a Dlinemen and assuming they also kept Wright they'd be in awesome shape there. They would also have a much easier time acquiring LB help as there would be a bigger pool of talent to draw from and the holes at LB wouldn't be as big (and if either Bruschi or Seau resigned they could help out as a role player). Depthwise they could really load up the roster in this type of D

This would be a drastic change and I don't think BB would do it yet if there was a time to screw around with more of a 4-3 it could be next year.

 

[David Yudkin]

I think they will play more 4-3 next year, but I dout they would install it as the base defense.

 

[Boston]

I think they will play more 4-3 next year, but I dout they would install it as the base defense.

Just promise me that Monty Beisel won't be within 1,000 miles of Foxboro...

 

[David Yudkin]

I think they will play more 4-3 next year, but I dout they would install it as the base defense.

Just promise me that Monty Beisel won't be within 1,000 miles of Foxboro...

I believe Arizona meets your mileage requirement. Maybe he soiled the defensive effort in the Super Bowl by his mere pressence . . .

 

[Boston]

I think they will play more 4-3 next year, but I dout they would install it as the base defense.

Just promise me that Monty Beisel won't be within 1,000 miles of Foxboro...

I believe Arizona meets your mileage requirement. Maybe he soiled the defensive effort in the Super Bowl by his mere pressence . . .

If he and Duane Starks were both in Arizona last weekend I can officially get over the loss because it now makes sense.

 

[David Yudkin]

I think they will play more 4-3 next year, but I dout they would install it as the base defense.

Just promise me that Monty Beisel won't be within 1,000 miles of Foxboro...

I believe Arizona meets your mileage requirement. Maybe he soiled the defensive effort in the Super Bowl by his mere pressence . . .

If he and Duane Starks were both in Arizona last weekend I can officially get over the loss because it now makes sense.

Starks was EXHIBIT A to illustrate that any player can look good provided he has 10 Pro Bowl teammates on defense. They definitely had him pegged all wrong. He was brutal when he was in Foxboro. I'd call him the Eric Gagne of the Patriots.

 

[Road Warriors]

I think they will play more 4-3 next year, but I dout they would install it as the base defense.

Just promise me that Monty Beisel won't be within 1,000 miles of Foxboro...

I believe Arizona meets your mileage requirement. Maybe he soiled the defensive effort in the Super Bowl by his mere pressence . . .

If he and Duane Starks were both in Arizona last weekend I can officially get over the loss because it now makes sense.

Starks was EXHIBIT A to illustrate that any player can look good provided he has 10 Pro Bowl teammates on defense. They definely had him pegged all wrong. He was brutal when he was in Foxboro. I'd call him the Eric Gagne of the Patriots.

Dude... Thats harsh!

 

[Boston]

I think they will play more 4-3 next year, but I dout they would install it as the base defense.

Just promise me that Monty Beisel won't be within 1,000 miles of Foxboro...

I believe Arizona meets your mileage requirement. Maybe he soiled the defensive effort in the Super Bowl by his mere pressence . . .

If he and Duane Starks were both in Arizona last weekend I can officially get over the loss because it now makes sense.

Starks was EXHIBIT A to illustrate that any player can look good provided he has 10 Pro Bowl teammates on defense. They definely had him pegged all wrong. He was brutal when he was in Foxboro. I'd call him the Eric Gagne of the Patriots.

Great comparasion...like Gagne it wasn't just that Sraks was bad...it was how bad he was that blew me away. In all honesty the two most dissapointing players (i.e. they were beyond horrible when I thought they would be good) I have ever seen in a Patriot uni (and there have been plenty) were starks and Marion Butts. Just horrible football players during their brief time in Foxboro. They both contributed more to the opponent than the Pats.

 

[Gatorman]

I think BB waits to see what vet LBs are cut and goes after 2 or 3 of them to retool that position. One player I really worry about ending up in foxboro is Zach Thomas. Parcells and co have been mum on him, and he seems like the perfect "fit" LB for the patriots (smart, quick, and a film junkie).

His draft pick will be DL or OL. That's where he picks. easiest guys to project and insert from day 1 (maybe a CB if samuel leaves, but rookie corners are always raw when coming in).

On offense, I am not sure how much longer new england will rely on Matt Light at T. The guy is a turnstile vs. strong edge rushers. The Phins were able to beat the pats soley on Jason Taylor's ability to own Light in their games (a few years ago, when they were mediocre vs. horrible), and the SB was another example of him being overwhelmed and outclassed vs. good pass rushers.

As for the idea of letting kevin faulk become a FA, I see bill parcells ringing him up if that happens as he will look to hurt NE as much as help Miami in the rebuilding process.

 

[David Yudkin]

I think BB waits to see what vet LBs are cut and goes after 2 or 3 of them to retool that position. One player I really worry about ending up in foxboro is Zach Thomas. Parcells and co have been mum on him, and he seems like the perfect "fit" LB for the patriots (smart, quick, and a film junkie).His draft pick will be DL or OL. That's where he picks. easiest guys to project and insert from day 1 (maybe a CB if samuel leaves, but rookie corners are always raw when coming in).On offense, I am not sure how much longer new england will rely on Matt Light at T. The guy is a turnstile vs. strong edge rushers. The Phins were able to beat the pats soley on Jason Taylor's ability to own Light in their games (a few years ago, when they were mediocre vs. horrible), and the SB was another example of him being overwhelmed and outclassed vs. good pass rushers.As for the idea of letting kevin faulk become a FA, I see bill parcells ringing him up if that happens as he will look to hurt NE as much as help Miami in the rebuilding process.

I'm not really sure I agree with the Light comments. I mean, the guy was ALL PRO this year along with Walter Jones (and was Pro Bowl last year). (Although I am biased because my kid goes to his football camp.)All lineman have games where they get beat. Light has owned guys like Merriman, so it's not like he is as average as your description here. IMO, if he is having issues on occasion getting beat, you need to adjust and give him help with a TE or RB. As for Faulk, given his team first nature I would expect that he will reowrk his deal to save a few cap $$$ this year.I do find it interesting that there are now not one but two Patriots pirates in the Jets and Dolphins looking to scavenge the Pats roster. It'll be interesting to see how many NE players end up in the division.

 

[Bri]

I do find it interesting that there are now not one but two Patriots pirates in the Jets and Dolphins looking to scavenge the Pats roster. It'll be interesting to see how many NE players end up in the division.

I wonder if Atlanta will do something similar as well.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

His draft pick will be DL or OL. That's where he picks. easiest guys to project and insert from day 1 (maybe a CB if samuel leaves, but rookie corners are always raw when coming in).On offense, I am not sure how much longer new england will rely on Matt Light at T. The guy is a turnstile vs. strong edge rushers. The Phins were able to beat the pats soley on Jason Taylor's ability to own Light in their games (a few years ago, when they were mediocre vs. horrible), and the SB was another example of him being overwhelmed and outclassed vs. good pass rushers.

I'm not really sure I agree with the Light comments. I mean, the guy was ALL PRO this year along with Walter Jones (and was Pro Bowl last year). (Although I am biased because my kid goes to his football camp.)

I agree with Gatorman. BB does a great job projecting the trenches. It wouldn't surprise me to see NE go Clady or some tackle they really like if they stay at 7.