You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Patriots Draft Prospects 2013
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 58, 59, 60  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 13779
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
I don't understand - the team has shown a total and utter inability to either adequately scout or adequately coach young DB's

Yet, we want them to take a DB in the 1st and or 2nd round?

No thanks.

Throw a ton of money at a FA or 2 and be done with it. It's very rare that I advocate that approach, but use the draft to add cheap cost controlled talent elsewhere and spend the big bucks on DB's.

It's not an either/or situation; they should do both. Yes, the development has been lackluster, but I think the talent is poor in general. Patrick Chung was not worthy of a second round pick at the time, and I remain more convinced of that now. Dowling was an injury risk from the start. The jury is still out on Wilson, McCourty is what he is, and everyone else is basically a UDFA JAG. Drafting some real athletic talent at those positions instead of guys that are overvalued due to scheme fit and filling in the holes with junk has been a big part of the problem. A veteran presence plus an athletically gifted youngster or two is the exact approach I'd take.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dhunt2402


Moderator
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 26048
Location: The District
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hunt will absolutely be a first rounder after the combine he's sure to have. Hate to make the Watt comparison, but athletically it's certainly there.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 32062
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
I don't understand - the team has shown a total and utter inability to either adequately scout or adequately coach young DB's

Yet, we want them to take a DB in the 1st and or 2nd round?

No thanks.

Throw a ton of money at a FA or 2 and be done with it. It's very rare that I advocate that approach, but use the draft to add cheap cost controlled talent elsewhere and spend the big bucks on DB's.

It's not an either/or situation; they should do both. Yes, the development has been lackluster, but I think the talent is poor in general. Patrick Chung was not worthy of a second round pick at the time, and I remain more convinced of that now. Dowling was an injury risk from the start. The jury is still out on Wilson, McCourty is what he is, and everyone else is basically a UDFA JAG. Drafting some real athletic talent at those positions instead of guys that are overvalued due to scheme fit and filling in the holes with junk has been a big part of the problem. A veteran presence plus an athletically gifted youngster or two is the exact approach I'd take.


So you think after 12 years, the Patriots (Belichick) are all of a sudden going to change the way they scout and evaluate CB talent?

It just seems unrealistic to me to expect the team to hit it big with a drafted DB. It's a waste of draft picks at this point. WR's I can understand because Brady is somewhat fickle about his receivers, the offense is complex and WR's flop at an extremely high rate. But in 12 years the Pats have come up with Asante Samuel as the only big success, with partial successes I guess to McCourty, Eugene Wilson (?) and some mediocre role players like Hobbs and Sanders.

It's easy to sit there and say "well I didn't like those guys they drafted in the first place" and that's fine, but why do you expect them to get away from taking guys that you don't like? Wanting them to go with more athletic guys over scheme fit guys is great, but expecting that to happen is probably an exercise in futility.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 13779
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
So you think after 12 years, the Patriots (Belichick) are all of a sudden going to change the way they scout and evaluate CB talent?

No. This is what I want. Outside of a handful of guys, the Pats don't typically take the guys I want.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 13779
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dhunt2402 wrote:
Hunt will absolutely be a first rounder after the combine he's sure to have. Hate to make the Watt comparison, but athletically it's certainly there.

Shhhh. Don't jinx it.

Of course, failing that scenario unfolding, there's always Ezekiel Ansah...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 32062
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
So you think after 12 years, the Patriots (Belichick) are all of a sudden going to change the way they scout and evaluate CB talent?

No. This is what I want. Outside of a handful of guys, the Pats don't typically take the guys I want.


I suppose the difference between you and I is that I don't hope for or covet (for the Patriots) guys who will almost certainly not be strong considerations.

I don't want the Pats to take more DB's because it almost certainly won't work out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
goldfishwars


Joined: 27 Mar 2011
Posts: 11937
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
I don't understand - the team has shown a total and utter inability to either adequately scout or adequately coach young DB's

Yet, we want them to take a DB in the 1st and or 2nd round?

No thanks.



Definitely a fair point. Not sure it's a coaching issue - judging from the players who have left and done little elsewhere. This lies squarely with the scouting department. We've had a habit of getting a little cute, of over thinking the position, looking for templates and eeking out value rather than picking a guy who can flat out play. Surely in the aggressive moves to take Chandler and Do,nt'a this year, it's got to the point where, hopefully, we'll go out on a limb and take the best guy available. Not sure we can ignore the secondary in the draft - sad to say. Even if we do go out and get a FA, which we'll need to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
goldfishwars


Joined: 27 Mar 2011
Posts: 11937
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dhunt2402 wrote:
Hunt will absolutely be a first rounder after the combine he's sure to have. Hate to make the Watt comparison, but athletically it's certainly there.


Ah yeah, you're right. Hunt is probably exactly the kind of prospect whose workout numbers will froth up the evalators and have him soaring up the stock charts close to the draft.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 32062
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

goldfishwars wrote:
Not sure it's a coaching issue - judging from the players who have left and done little elsewhere.


Could this not also be explained by these players not getting the proper coaching early in their careers or getting "overcoached"? I don't think it's necessarily an either/or


Quote:
This lies squarely with the scouting department. We've had a habit of getting a little cute, of over thinking the position, looking for templates and eeking out value rather than picking a guy who can flat out play.


I don't know about that. I don't think the Pats say "let's not take a guy who can 'flat out play'"

I think - like all teams - there are certain characteristics they like in their DB's and the guys who (in their heads, perhaps not in reality) have the best chance of success in New England possess those characteristics. I don't think the team would shy away from someone a bit outside of their ideal if that guy was extraordinarily good in other attributes - but you don't often see that in the parts of the draft where the Pats usually pick. You see guys who are flawed in one way or another, and the Pats tend to prefer guys whose flaws don't fit within that "template" so to speak.

That said, Brandon Meriweather was a guy who many thought could "flat out play" and was more of an athletic type than a "template" type and how did that turn out? Not too well.

Quote:
Surely in the aggressive moves to take Chandler and Do,nt'a this year, it's got to the point where, hopefully, we'll go out on a limb and take the best guy available. Not sure we can ignore the secondary in the draft - sad to say. Even if we do go out and get a FA, which we'll need to.


Do you have any proof that the Pats don't take the best guy available? By best guy, I'm sure you mean "best guy on their board" because there is never a consensus "best guy available" and if you're advocating they take the #1 player left on Mel Kiper's board at each pick well.........
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nextsuperstar


Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Posts: 1860
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Center really should be addressed. Wendell has already allowed four qb sacks on the season (in excusable for a center to allow so many sacks). Connolly was only mediocre playing center last year.

I would prefer that the DB issues be addressed in free agency (DRC and Byrd among other viable options).


A three technique DT would be a nice addition. So would a young WR.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
goldfishwars


Joined: 27 Mar 2011
Posts: 11937
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
goldfishwars wrote:
Not sure it's a coaching issue - judging from the players who have left and done little elsewhere.


Could this not also be explained by these players not getting the proper coaching early in their careers or getting "overcoached"? I don't think it's necessarily an either/or


Yes, that's fair - although the sheer number of secondary players who have been drafted by the Pats, left the team and done little elsewhere indicates an issue with talent evaluation more than coaching to me.

Quote:
I don't know about that. I don't think the Pats say "let's not take a guy who can 'flat out play'"


Yeah, that was probably worded poorly. What I mean is, a guy who just really looks the part you know? Someone who passes the eye ball test - we never seem to covet 'that guy' when it comes to secondary players. I realise I'm talking in generics - but the 'template' of the kind of guy we have been putting out, isn't someone who can jam his man at the line and dominate his opponent. Ras-I aside, there's generally been more preference for a lighter, fleet of foot, quick-witted - high calibre guy.

Quote:
Do you have any proof that the Pats don't take the best guy available? By best guy, I'm sure you mean "best guy on their board" because there is never a consensus "best guy available" and if you're advocating they take the #1 player left on Mel Kiper's board at each pick well.........


Half answered this above. I'm talking about the years of trading down - not using our 1st round draft picks. This has brought us varying success, for whatever reason it hasn't delivered us a single top quality secondary player. I wouldn't be surprised if the desperation to find 'value' approach hasn't led to a situation where we have missed out on the top guy on our board because 'well, there's a couple of other guys we kind of like too and if we misss, then so be it.'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 32062
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

goldfishwars wrote:


Quote:
I don't know about that. I don't think the Pats say "let's not take a guy who can 'flat out play'"


Yeah, that was probably worded poorly. What I mean is, a guy who just really looks the part you know? Someone who passes the eye ball test - we never seem to covet 'that guy' when it comes to secondary players. I realise I'm talking in generics - but the 'template' of the kind of guy we have been putting out, isn't someone who can jam his man at the line and dominate his opponent. Ras-I aside, there's generally been more preference for a lighter, fleet of foot, quick-witted - high calibre guy.


I think the problem that exists is that we (as fans) see those types of guys succeed elsewhere and the "small fleet of foot" guys fail here and assume that the reason the "small" guys fail and the "big dominating" guy succeeds is based on size.

Revis is 5'10, Finnegan is 5'11, Joseph is 5'11. Webb is 5'11 etc, Samuel 5'10 etc.

The Pats like guys who can flip their hips quickly and can project either outside or inside (the all important versatility). If there has been one real knock on the pre-2010 Pats DB selections (and I'd posit that McCourty and Dowling are both breaks from the previous mold) it is that the CB's tended to be "soft" in style and not aggressive. Not aggressive hitters, not aggressive in their play on the ball. I'd say that they haven't done a good job identifying or prioritizing "instincts". Their CB's have - year after year - been burned on simple fake outs from WR's. The safeties they've drafted have - year after year - have been atrocious on playaction fakes.

I don't know how to solve the issue outside of taking a top 10 type talent like Haden or Claiborne.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomRalph


Joined: 03 Apr 2009
Posts: 12715
Location: #TheyHateUsCuzTheyAintUs
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nextsuperstar wrote:
Center really should be addressed. Wendell has already allowed four qb sacks on the season (in excusable for a center to allow so many sacks). Connolly was only mediocre playing center last year.

I would prefer that the DB issues be addressed in free agency (DRC and Byrd among other viable options).


A three technique DT would be a nice addition. So would a young WR.


I ain't touching the O until the Secondary is at least just below average. The tripe we have to watch week in week out is getting unbearable
_________________
Adopt-a-Patriot '14: Danny Amendola Status: Allegedly Deflating Balls On The Sideline
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
24isthelaw


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 7885
Location: Where the Patriots are
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

goldfishwars wrote:

Yeah, that was probably worded poorly. What I mean is, a guy who just really looks the part you know? Someone who passes the eye ball test - we never seem to covet 'that guy' when it comes to secondary players. I realise I'm talking in generics - but the 'template' of the kind of guy we have been putting out, isn't someone who can jam his man at the line and dominate his opponent. Ras-I aside, there's generally been more preference for a lighter, fleet of foot, quick-witted - high calibre guy.


How do you define looking the part though? As McMurtry said, most of the best corners don't fit a prototype. But also on the flip side of the coin, a lot of guys "look the part" and aren't very good. Antwuan Molden was 6'1-6'2 with ridiculous length - didn't exactly scare anyone. Apart from strapping, Heisman-caliber athletes like Bailey, Woodson, Peterson, I don't think you can just look at a corner and say "he's going to be very good."
_________________

Adopt-a-Patriot: Marcus Forston - Practice squad (0 tackles, 0 sacks)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
goldfishwars


Joined: 27 Mar 2011
Posts: 11937
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

24isthelaw wrote:
goldfishwars wrote:

Yeah, that was probably worded poorly. What I mean is, a guy who just really looks the part you know? Someone who passes the eye ball test - we never seem to covet 'that guy' when it comes to secondary players. I realise I'm talking in generics - but the 'template' of the kind of guy we have been putting out, isn't someone who can jam his man at the line and dominate his opponent. Ras-I aside, there's generally been more preference for a lighter, fleet of foot, quick-witted - high calibre guy.


How do you define looking the part though? As McMurtry said, most of the best corners don't fit a prototype. But also on the flip side of the coin, a lot of guys "look the part" and aren't very good. Antwuan Molden was 6'1-6'2 with ridiculous length - didn't exactly scare anyone. Apart from strapping, Heisman-caliber athletes like Bailey, Woodson, Peterson, I don't think you can just look at a corner and say "he's going to be very good."


It's not really a size thing, it's more of an aggression/competetiveness thing - a 'dawg' as Deion Sanders would put it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 58, 59, 60  Next
Page 3 of 60

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group