2018 Draft Buildup

Well isnt that the Key.

If you sitting at 2 its really not "Barkley or GoodplayerX" but rather Barkley or the assemblage of picks you could get from some other team who covets someone (maybe even Barkley) at 2 and is willing to move up to get him.

So Barkley (all world RB on an expensive contract) or say the players you could get with the 7th, 43rd and a future 2nd Rounder.

I think you need to take that deal (or one similar) every time.

dcmissle said:

Running backs and guards ... but there are exceptions to every rule, right? Moneyball has its limitations.

Quenton Nelson is getting drafted high. Anyone who wants to poke fun at the drafting team, have at it. Serious people have said he’s about the best O-lineman they personally have seen. If I have a chance to draft a John Hannah 2.0, I am drafting John Hannah 2.0.

Ditto Adrian Peterson. So the question with Barkley may be, is he an AP, can he change an offense by himself? Reasonable people may differ. I don’t think it’s reasonable to laugh at the notion that he is the best player in this draft.

Click to expand...

This is fair. I think the issue with the contract is that you have little wiggle room if your eval is wrong. If you draft Barkley 4 or whatever thinking he's generationally great and just, I don't know, Mark Ingram good, he's overpaid.

BaseballJones said:

I personally think Eli is good enough to lead the Giants to another Super Bowl appearance, if the rest of the team is sufficiently good around him. In other words, I don't think he's washed up or terrible. Having an all-world talent like Barkley would go a long ways to helping the Giants' offense. I think it makes a lot of sense for them to snag Barkley if Cleveland doesn't take him #1.

Click to expand...

If Eli is good enough to make another Super Bowl appearance, why does he need so much offensive help? They already have OBJ, used a second on Shepherd, used their first last year on Engram, made Solder the highest-paid LT ever. Now they need Barkley, too? They were 27th in scoring defense and 31st in yardage D and traded away their best pass rusher. Honestly, it seems like they're all in on "get Eli into the HOF" rather than winning games.

Saints Rest said:

I had an argument with some guys I play hoops with a couple weeks ago about Barkley. My point is that even if he is as good as AP in his prime, what does that get you? What good did AP do the Vikings? Or Barry Sanders for the Lions? Or Walter Payton to the Bears (until they put together one of the 2-3 greatest single-season defenses of all time)?

But from a marketing POV, Barkley can make sense, even to a team like the Giants who have no problem selling tickets or getting eyeballs. But for a franchise like the Browns a guy like Barkley can generate excitement. OTOH, even if Nelson is John Hannah 2.0, I really don't know what that gets you, either on the field or in the marketing department. Getting a stud LT at least has concrete on-field value, a stud OG? Valuable, yes, but top-5 pick valuable???

Click to expand...

You could make arguments along similar lines for pretty much every position.

bakahump said:

Well isnt that the Key.

If you sitting at 2 its really not "Barkley or GoodplayerX" but rather Barkley or the assemblage of picks you could get from some other team who covets someone (maybe even Barkley) at 2 and is willing to move up to get him.

So Barkley (all world RB on an expensive contract) or say the players you could get with the 7th, 43rd and a future 2nd Rounder.

I think you need to take that deal (or one similar) every time.

Click to expand...

Super Nomario said:

This is fair. I think the issue with the contract is that you have little wiggle room if your eval is wrong. If you draft Barkley 4 or whatever thinking he's generationally great and just, I don't know, Mark Ingram good, he's overpaid.

If Eli is good enough to make another Super Bowl appearance, why does he need so much offensive help? They already have OBJ, used a second on Shepherd, used their first last year on Engram, made Solder the highest-paid LT ever. Now they need Barkley, too? They were 27th in scoring defense and 31st in yardage D and traded away their best pass rusher. Honestly, it seems like they're all in on "get Eli into the HOF" rather than winning games.

You could make arguments along similar lines for pretty much every position.

Click to expand...

To SN's statement, I pretty much agree with baka one post above; the importance of TEAM in the NFL is such, that it almost always is better to turn one pick into multiple picks. Now taken to an extreme, one would end up with a draft that consists of having pretty much every pick in the 5th, 6th, and 7th rounds -- which is beyond silly. But for a team that is picking that high (say top-5), they almost by definition have multiple needs. And considering the volatility of draft picks, multiple picks in the top 50 are going to be worth more than one in the top 5. Yes, even when you are talking about QB's. Bledsoe or Mirer. Manning or Leaf. Couch or McNabb. JaMarcus Russell. (Quick aside: that 2007 draft was a barren wasteland for QB's. Russell and Brady Quinn were the only 1st round QB picks, with 3 more do-nothings int eh 2nd round and a total of 11 eminently forgettable picks overall. Wow.)

I love the rumors 1-3 days before the draft. So Cleveland apparently now has soured on Darnold and prefers either Allen or Mayfield. Oh and Rosen is not going in the top 10 and never was. He isn't slipping he just isn't thought highly of. I feel like we need the truth-o-meter here but we won't really know until tomorrow. Still, I love the chaos and misdirection sent our way. It's picking kernels of truth out of loads of shit at this point. More entertaining than actually useful. Still, a decent way to keep amused while killing time before Draftmas.

RedOctober3829 said:

I’m hearing that the #Patriots are very high on #NotreDame LT Mike McGlinchey and could even move up on Thursday night to select him.

Click to expand...

He seems an awful lot like Nate Solder 2.0 (tall, mobile, not as powerful as some other tackles, good athlete, moves better, relatively strong in the run game for a LT) and locking down that slot for the next five-ten years depending on the second contract would be a great use of a first round pick

Super Nomario said:

If Eli is good enough to make another Super Bowl appearance, why does he need so much offensive help? They already have OBJ, used a second on Shepherd, used their first last year on Engram, made Solder the highest-paid LT ever. Now they need Barkley, too? They were 27th in scoring defense and 31st in yardage D and traded away their best pass rusher. Honestly, it seems like they're all in on "get Eli into the HOF" rather than winning games.

Click to expand...

Well first off, their offensive line was terrible. Second, most QBs need help to win a SB. Some more than others. I'm not saying they WILL take Barkley, or that they SHOULD take Barkley - if I was them, I'd draft the QB they love - but I am saying that I think it can make sense for them to take Barkley if they still think Eli can be a SB winning QB.

And there is always the possibility in my hypothetical (albeit slight) that you trade the #2 for the #7+other picks and Barkley ends up available at 7 anyway.

My point is eventually Barkley becomes too good a value.....even for a short shelf life position like RB.

Have your cake and eat it too.

All this assumes that indeed Eli is there (and they are confident he will be effective) for a couple more. If not then opportunity cost comes into play. Will they get another shot at a top 3 QB in the next year or two? Will those prospects be as good as these?

tims4wins said:

Tomorrow night is gonna be bananas. I can't wait.

Click to expand...

Totally with you on this.

BaseballJones said:

Totally with you on this.

Click to expand...

Yeah it will be. Pens-Caps Game 1 and Celtics-Bucks Game 6. Crazy.

BaseballJones said:

Well first off, their offensive line was terrible. Second, most QBs need help to win a SB. Some more than others. I'm not saying they WILL take Barkley, or that they SHOULD take Barkley - if I was them, I'd draft the QB they love - but I am saying that I think it can make sense for them to take Barkley if they still think Eli can be a SB winning QB.

Click to expand...

Obviously they seem to be thinking what you're thinking but it's bananas IMO. Can Eli be a Super-Bowl-winning QB? Probably not but anything's possible, I guess. Can he be a Super-Bowl-winning QB when he's making a ton of money, the team is dumping all their draft capital into glamour skill players, and the defense is trash? You gotta be kidding me.

Super Nomario said:

Obviously they seem to be thinking what you're thinking but it's bananas IMO. Can Eli be a Super-Bowl-winning QB? Probably not but anything's possible, I guess. Can he be a Super-Bowl-winning QB when he's making a ton of money, the team is dumping all their draft capital into glamour skill players, and the defense is trash? You gotta be kidding me.

Click to expand...

I mean, in just the last 7 years we've seen the following win the Super Bowl:

Eli
Flacco (!)
Wilson
Brady
Peyton when he was HORRIFIC
Brady
Foles

There's no reason to think that with the right team around him, Eli can't win the SB again. I don't know that Barkley is really the key piece. But if he's as good as he appears to be, that would open up things for OBJ in a major, major way and take a ton of pressure off Eli.

Anyway, what do I care? It's the stupid Giants. I'm fine if they finish last for the rest of time.

A few notes from Dallas:
+Lamar Jackson visited w/Patriots 2x: private workout in S.Fla w/McDaniels plus visit to Foxborough

Either the interest in Jackson is very real or this is one elaborate smokescreen.

BaseballJones said:

I mean, in just the last 7 years we've seen the following win the Super Bowl:

Eli
Flacco (!)
Wilson
Brady
Peyton when he was HORRIFIC
Brady
Foles

There's no reason to think that with the right team around him, Eli can't win the SB again. I don't know that Barkley is really the key piece. But if he's as good as he appears to be, that would open up things for OBJ in a major, major way and take a ton of pressure off Eli.

Anyway, what do I care? It's the stupid Giants. I'm fine if they finish last for the rest of time.

Click to expand...

Agree with this. Eli was very good in their playoff loss to GB. His WRs dropped a million passes in that one. Last year, he lost basically his entire WR corp and had a crap OL.

This year, he’ll have OBJ back, Solder at LT, and presumably a better defense. If they add Barkley, that will be a dynamic offense. I wouldn’t like the value but I could at least understand it if they decided to make a GFIN move.

I haven't read all the posts, but IMO Barkely at #2 is a poor use of a valuable asset. G-men even with the addition of Solder, still have a questionable O-line, and a running back with no O-line will get squashed. Last year Eli had to rely on short passes or get killed, there was no long passing game as he never had time.

IMO If the G-men don't draft Eli's successor they should trade down for a package of picks to rebuild the line on both sides of the ball.

I like to think that a rebuilding team would ideally take a multiple year approach where the first year you try to build the infrastructure of the team. To me, that means you focus resources (a mix of high-upside youth (draft picks) and dependable veteran leadership (free agents)) on the trenches first with a secondary focus on other positions. Then in the second year you focus resources on skill positions (with a primary focus on the QB position). This way, when you draft your franchise QB you are putting him in a good position with an offensive line that can protect him, a defense that can win the team games and some veterans to assume leadership roles on the team while the QB learns and acclimates to the NFL. Then in the third year, you acquire supplemental talent that both complements the QB and replaces some of the veteran leadership from year one of the rebuild that will be aging out of their role on the team (either due to salary/contract or effectiveness).

So, it's possible that the Giants are in that first year of a rebuild where they want to build the infrastructure of the team, roll with Eli for another year, and then focus on finding their QB next year. In that case, they are probably best served by trading down from 2. With that said, if they are going to trade down from 2, they will probably maximize their return by waiting until after the Browns make their pick before trading down.

Now, maybe they think that the addition of Solder and the veterans they already have in place already have them in that second-year phase where they can focus on getting their next franchise QB. In this case, they probably have one or two QBs that they value over the others, and they want to wait and see who the Browns draft before deciding their next move.

Either way, the Giants are in a holding pattern until the Browns make their pick, but for now the best thing they can do for themselves is to investigate all possibilities and to obscure their intentions.

Regardless, I don't see Barkley at 2 as the best solution and I doubt that's what they do.

The Giants have holes everywhere and should definitely trade down. I guess I could see taking a QB they think is the answer at 2, but short of that get as big a bounty as you can and add as much talent as you can.

BigSoxFan said:

Agree with this. Eli was very good in their playoff loss to GB. His WRs dropped a million passes in that one. Last year, he lost basically his entire WR corp and had a crap OL.

This year, he’ll have OBJ back, Solder at LT, and presumably a better defense. If they add Barkley, that will be a dynamic offense. I wouldn’t like the value but I could at least understand it if they decided to make a GFIN move.

Click to expand...

I would hazard that adding Nelson and any one of a handful of RB FA's or later round RB's would be worth more than Barkley and a scrub OG, especially if they could somehow trade #2 to someone like Denver (or Buffalo leapfrogging up) and still make that work.

RedOctober3829 said:

A few notes from Dallas:
+Lamar Jackson visited w/Patriots 2x: private workout in S.Fla w/McDaniels plus visit to Foxborough

Either the interest in Jackson is very real or this is one elaborate smokescreen.

Click to expand...

At some point, the opportunity cost of wasting time with players you have no intention of drafting would seem to tilt negative.

Aren't BB and McDaniels busy enough that scheduling private workouts and meetings with guys just so some other team goes "Oh no--Patriots are interested" is just not that smart?

DrewDawg said:

At some point, the opportunity cost of wasting time with players you have no intention of drafting would seem to tilt negative.

Aren't BB and McDaniels busy enough that scheduling private workouts and meetings with guys just so some other team goes "Oh no--Patriots are interested" is just not that smart?

Click to expand...

Agree completely. I think this is a narrative for media talking heads and fans who want to believe that what the Patriots do dictates the moves of other teams

DrewDawg said:

At some point, the opportunity cost of wasting time with players you have no intention of drafting would seem to tilt negative.

Aren't BB and McDaniels busy enough that scheduling private workouts and meetings with guys just so some other team goes "Oh no--Patriots are interested" is just not that smart?

Click to expand...

Even if they don't select a player in the draft, there is value in getting to know the player, (1) if he is going to play for a competitor & (2) if he will be a free agent in five years.

E5 Yaz said:

Agree completely. I think this is a narrative for media talking heads and fans who want to believe that what the Patriots do dictates the moves of other teams

Click to expand...

Since 2013, when we can get data on this, Pats 1-4 round draftees are almost 80% guys they brought in or had strong college connections to. If you weigh the value of the prospects visited it correlates to what they actually do.

pappymojo said:

Even if they don't select a player in the draft, there is value in getting to know the player, (1) if he is going to play for a competitor & (2) if he will be a free agent in five years.

Click to expand...

There's no doubt. But I'd think you want to get to know the guys you have an interest in drafting, then, even if you don't you have that intel, as opposed to 2 visits with someone just to get scouting info on a guy you might face a few times and might possibly sign 5 years later, who has a lot of actual NFL game film available.

Who, you know, you can also meet with at that time.

SMU_Sox said:

Since 2013, when we can get data on this, Pats 1-4 round draftees are almost 80% guys they brought in or had strong college connections to. If you weigh the value of the prospects visited it correlates to what they actually do.

Click to expand...

So the opposite of the "smokescreen" stuff? Unless we know how that compares to other teams though, I'm not sure what that tells us.

DrewDawg said:

So the opposite of the "smokescreen" stuff? Unless we know how that compares to other teams though, I'm not sure what that tells us.

Click to expand...

Sometimes, we find out after the fact that the Pats met with a player they drafted. It's not always the guys that are reported to have met with beforehand. I've heard that a number of "visits" are even done via FaceTime.

Don't know if this should be for a separate thread, but I want to talk, in the buildup to the draft, at what I *want* the Patriots to do. Not what they WILL do, but what I WANT them to do.

Here's their draft capital:

1st round pick (23rd overall) (via Los Angeles, acquired in the Cooks trade)
1st round pick (31st overall) (NE)
2nd round pick (43rd overall) (via San Francisco, acquired in the Garoppolo trade)
2nd round pick (63rd overall) (NE)
3rd round pick (95th overall) (NE)
6th round pick (198th overall) (via Los Angeles, acquired in the Cooks trade)
6th round pick (210th overall) (via Oakland, acquired in the Cordarrelle Patterson trade)
7th round pick (219th overall) (via Cleveland, acquired in the Danny Shelton trade)

So they have 4 of the first 63 picks (one out of every 16), and 5 out of the first 95 (one out of every 19). They end with three picks in rounds 6-7. Those first five picks will be significant. Here's the PFF top 100 prospect list: https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pff-draft-board-top-100-players-for-the-2018-nfl-draft

Not that BB will go by that or anything, but it's helpful to see what talent might be available for them.

Here are some positional needs as I see them:

LB - Hightower is great but injury prone; Van Noy is adequate at best; the rest is problematic
CB - like Gilmore and McCourty, and Rowe is ok; hope JJones improves, but wouldn't be bad to add another quality CB
S - good quality with McCourty, Chung, and Harmon, but need to get younger
OT - losing Solder hurt, and so could use someone else; maybe Garcia (2017 draft) is the next starting LT but I'm not sure
QB - Brady's replacement?

I think they're fine at interior OL, RB, WR, TE, and maybe even DL, though they could use another pass rusher. If there's a stud pass rusher available, I could see BB picking him.

Obviously we don't know how the draft will unfold or who will be available for BB at 23 or 31 or wherever. And it's possible, of course, for him to trade up, using multiple draft picks to do it. But based on what we know (which isn't much beyond who's available right now and what their needs are and what their draft slots are), here's what I'd like to see happen.

I'd like to draft LB with #23. I'm thinking Vander Esch, who is an off the chart athlete. They need to get much faster and more athletic at LB.

With the #31, I'd like to possibly trade down into the second round and add another third round pick.

With the #43, I'd like to take QB Kyle Lauletta. Can throw the ball, and is athletic enough. He is highly accurate, but doesn't have a big arm. I think that can be developed, as he's only a sophomore. Give him a couple of years in an NFL weight program and I think his arm strength can improve at least into the adequate category. The other pluses in his game are things that often don't develop as well, as they're mental tools, not physical tools. A couple of years with McDaniels and in an NFL weight program and I think he'd be pretty solid.

With the #63 and the other second rounder they pick up on the trade for #31, I'd like for them to address CB and LB.

With the two third-rounders I'd expect them to trade one of them to add a fourth and maybe fifth round picks (maybe they have to throw in their own 7th to make this happen). With the other, I'd like to see them add either a left tackle that Dante can develop, or a young safety with upside.

With the fourth or fifth rounder they pick up in the trade I just mentioned, I like DT Folorunso Fatukasi out of UConn. Really powerful, and a pretty solid athlete. Has a bit of a nasty streak in him that would play well. 6'4", 315.

Round out the draft by taking best player available, though I know BB typically does that anyway. But BPA with an eye towards offensive tackle maybe?

I don't want the Patriots to trade a bunch of draft capital to get Rosen or Mayfield or Jackson. Though if one of those guys is there for them at #23, yeah maybe just pull the trigger. But I really don't know that any of those guys is going to end up being better than Lauletta when all is said and done, so with that in mind, I'd rather use those picks on other needs before grabbing the next QB.

SMU_Sox said:

I’m not going to argue that Barkley is not a top 3/5/10 player. He is, I think. But taking a RB, even if they are the perfect RB, at 2 is too rich for me. I think that’s a poor use of draft capital. I’d rather take a QB to replace Manning, trade back, or take Chubb.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree with this more. The short shelf life and injuries at RB also argue (to me) that #2 too high. QB, DE, LB or CB are the only positions I'd ever consider here. Otherwise, I'd always look to trade back.

On that Vrentas tweet - Jackson marveling at seeing BB laugh is such a kick to me. It's a reminder about how the myths and legends of this iteration of the Pats resonate in this generation. A reaction like Jackson's brings it home again. Makes me giddy.

While the #Browns plan to stay put at No. 1, they've had a lot of conversations about the No. 4 pick, sources tell me and @RapSheet. That's normal due diligence, but an interesting scenario: Could they get their QB and then provide the pick for another team to get one?

SMU_Sox said:

Since 2013, when we can get data on this, Pats 1-4 round draftees are almost 80% guys they brought in or had strong college connections to. If you weigh the value of the prospects visited it correlates to what they actually do.

Click to expand...

I'm speaking to what Drew Dawg said (or at least how I interpreted it) ... that other teams don't worry about what the Patriots are doing during this period as much as media and fans seem to want to think

DrewDawg said:

So the opposite of the "smokescreen" stuff? Unless we know how that compares to other teams though, I'm not sure what that tells us.

Click to expand...

I had so much fun doing the research on the Pats I plan on working on this over the summer. I'll have to make sure I look at the most current GM regimes though. And I won't include colleges connected with the GM/Coach because I won't have the capacity to dive that deep. Should be a fun little mini project.

tims4wins said:

I mean that'd be really smart but who is gonna trade up to 4? Buffalo??

Click to expand...

That would be a primary taker, for sure. If the talk is real that the Browns are thinking Mayfield or Allen, and that leads to QBs going 1-2-3, the Browns might have suitors

E5 Yaz said:

I'm speaking to what Drew Dawg said (or at least how I interpreted it) ... that other teams don't worry about what the Patriots are doing during this period as much as media and fans seem to want to think

Click to expand...

Oh, I’m sorry. I agree with you then. Think teams might care to know where a guy they like could go but not for reasons of, “Well if New England likes him he must be good and we need to see him.”

DrewDawg said:

There's no doubt. But I'd think you want to get to know the guys you have an interest in drafting, then, even if you don't you have that intel, as opposed to 2 visits with someone just to get scouting info on a guy you might face a few times and might possibly sign 5 years later, who has a lot of actual NFL game film available.

Who, you know, you can also meet with at that time.

Click to expand...

I think it's all just due diligence. I mean, it's not like Belichick is known for cutting corners, avoiding work, or being found flat-footed when an expected situation changes. If he is working his ass off interviewing a player twice even if he doesn't think he will be in a position to draft that player, screw it. No days off.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/04/25/schneiders-comments-reveal-what-a-crapshoot-the-draft-really-is/

BigSoxFan said:

Agree with this. Eli was very good in their playoff loss to GB. His WRs dropped a million passes in that one. Last year, he lost basically his entire WR corp and had a crap OL.

Click to expand...

FWIW they were 26th in points, 25th in yards in 2016.

BigSoxFan said:

This year, he’ll have OBJ back, Solder at LT, and presumably a better defense. If they add Barkley, that will be a dynamic offense. I wouldn’t like the value but I could at least understand it if they decided to make a GFIN move.

Click to expand...

Why is the D presumably better? Just a dead cat bounce? They stunk out loud last year and just traded away the best pass rusher from a unit that was bottom-five in sacks and sack rate. I'm mystified that "GFIN" is an option for a team that has had one winning season (in which they went 8-3 in one-score games) in the last five and is coming off a 3-13 season. And why is Barkley a GFIN choice anyway? Is the one piece this team is missing an explosive RB?

pappymojo said:

I like to think that a rebuilding team would ideally take a multiple year approach where the first year you try to build the infrastructure of the team. To me, that means you focus resources (a mix of high-upside youth (draft picks) and dependable veteran leadership (free agents)) on the trenches first with a secondary focus on other positions. Then in the second year you focus resources on skill positions (with a primary focus on the QB position). This way, when you draft your franchise QB you are putting him in a good position with an offensive line that can protect him, a defense that can win the team games and some veterans to assume leadership roles on the team while the QB learns and acclimates to the NFL. Then in the third year, you acquire supplemental talent that both complements the QB and replaces some of the veteran leadership from year one of the rebuild that will be aging out of their role on the team (either due to salary/contract or effectiveness).

So, it's possible that the Giants are in that first year of a rebuild where they want to build the infrastructure of the team, roll with Eli for another year, and then focus on finding their QB next year. In that case, they are probably best served by trading down from 2. With that said, if they are going to trade down from 2, they will probably maximize their return by waiting until after the Browns make their pick before trading down.

Click to expand...

I might agree with this in principle but some positions are hard to fill without a high pick and they're currently drafting #2 in a QB-rich draft. That opportunity doesn't come along all the time. By the time they're "ready" for a QB, they might not be able to get one.

tims4wins said:

I mean that'd be really smart but who is gonna trade up to 4? Buffalo??

Click to expand...

Always remember Trubisky to the Bears last year. Nobody pre-draft was within 1000 miles of that. It makes sense to gauge interest for its own sake.

I don’t know what to make of the Pats and Lamar, other than I’m really rooting for it so don’t trust my own judgment.

Seem to be a lot of resources directed to him. OTOH, the Pats could not be more obvious in their interest if they tried. Just the last few days (I) he meets in Fox (II) pats intrigued and impressed, (III) now the Josh workout. And the detail — third parties cannot be leaking some of what we have heard.

Strikes me as a misdirection. Why? Maybe they are trying to camouflage strong interest in somebody else. You prime this so when the calls from the Pats come, the recipients think it’s about Lamar and are willing to make a deal on that basis.

Either that or they think he is a transcendent talent, are determined to get him one way or another, and just don’t give a fuck about appearances. But that’s a stretch.

E5 Yaz said:

I'm speaking to what Drew Dawg said (or at least how I interpreted it) ... that other teams don't worry about what the Patriots are doing during this period as much as media and fans seem to want to think

Click to expand...

There's that, but my main point was that they Patriots aren't doing this to smokescreen other teams. They don't strike me as a team that would spend time that they could use on evaluations of players they are interested in just to create noise around someone.

Leaks to press? Sure. McDaniels having workout with Jackson in Florida then Pats flying him up to meet BB? They are legitimately interested.

BaseballJones said:

I mean, in just the last 7 years we've seen the following win the Super Bowl:

Eli
Flacco (!)
Wilson
Brady
Peyton when he was HORRIFIC
Brady
Foles

There's no reason to think that with the right team around him, Eli can't win the SB again. I don't know that Barkley is really the key piece. But if he's as good as he appears to be, that would open up things for OBJ in a major, major way and take a ton of pressure off Eli.

Anyway, what do I care? It's the stupid Giants. I'm fine if they finish last for the rest of time.

Click to expand...

How many of these teams a) were paying their QBs as much as Eli is making now b) had defenses as bad as New York's c) had offensive lines as weak as the NYG? I count zero for all three. But you know what they say: the best teams load up on skill guys and ignore QB and trenches!

Super Nomario said:

FWIW they were 26th in points, 25th in yards in 2016.

Why is the D presumably better? Just a dead cat bounce? They stunk out loud last year and just traded away the best pass rusher from a unit that was bottom-five in sacks and sack rate. I'm mystified that "GFIN" is an option for a team that has had one winning season (in which they went 8-3 in one-score games) in the last five and is coming off a 3-13 season. And why is Barkley a GFIN choice anyway? Is the one piece this team is missing an explosive RB .

Click to expand...

The Giants had a very good defense 2 years ago. I have no idea what happened last year but I’m going to bet that they are better as a unit than last year. My guess is that 2018 is somewhere between 2016 and 2017.

As for Barkley, I hate the idea of drafting a RB that high and think Chubb should be their pick. But if you want to maximize whatever Eli has left, I can see why Barkley would be tempting. Again, I’m not advocating it at all but this is NY and there’s going to be pressure for a team that hasn’t been a real contender in 6 or 7 years to be good. I don’t think it’s crazy to believe that Barkley could one of the larger immediate impacts.

If I were running their team, I would be taking Chubb at #2 or trading down.

How often have the Patriots been linked to players pre-draft that they eventually took? Any big examples? Were they linked to Chandler Jones when they traded up?

BigSoxFan said:

The Giants had a very good defense 2 years ago. I have no idea what happened last year but I’m going to bet that they are better as a unit than last year. My guess is that 2018 is somewhere between 2016 and 2017.

As for Barkley, I hate the idea of drafting a RB that high and think Chubb should be their pick. But if you want to maximize whatever Eli has left, I can see why Barkley would be tempting. Again, I’m not advocating it at all but this is NY and there’s going to be pressure for a team that hasn’t been a real contender in 6 or 7 years to be good. I don’t think it’s crazy to believe that Barkley could one of the larger immediate impacts.

If I were running their team, I would be taking Chubb at #2 or trading down.

Click to expand...

I get the argument. Barkley could be a generational talent. He will help Manning be better by taking some pressure off of him. But their defensive front seven needs a pass rusher. JPP is gone. That defense looks ugly up front. They profile for maybe 20 sacks this year with that group. Barkley can help as a receiving RB in a shoot-out which they will be in if the defense doesn't get better. I think the JPP trade foreshadowed Chubb at 2.

One thing BB does is try to get ahold of players that give the Pats fits when they play them. That would include really athletic QBs like Deshaun Watson, Cam Newton and Russell Wilson.

BB can't get one of those actual guys, of course, but he might be able to get Lamar Jackson.

Conclusion: Not a smokescreen

Not to say they'll draft him, but I think the interest is very real, especially with Josh doing a private and discreet workout.

Red Averages said:

How often have the Patriots been linked to players pre-draft that they eventually took? Any big examples? Were they linked to Chandler Jones when they traded up?

Click to expand...

There's some discussion on this in the Draft forum...

RedOctober3829 said:

A few notes from Dallas:
+Lamar Jackson visited w/Patriots 2x: private workout in S.Fla w/McDaniels plus visit to Foxborough

Either the interest in Jackson is very real or this is one elaborate smokescreen.

Click to expand...

I wouldn’t really be shocked if it was the latter. The more QBs picked in the top half of the first, the more likely it is one of the top 10 defensive talents in a loaded draft fall.

Pandemonium67 said:

One thing BB does is try to get ahold of players that give the Pats fits when they play them. That would include really athletic QBs like Deshaun Watson, Cam Newton and Russell Wilson.

BB can't get one of those actual guys, of course, but he might be able to get Lamar Jackson.

Conclusion: Not a smokescreen

Not to say they'll draft him, but I think the interest is very real, especially with Josh doing a private and discreet workout.

Click to expand...

Inaccurate passer with a low wonderlic score doesn't scream Patriots QB...to me at least.

Rico Guapo said:

Inaccurate passer with a low wonderlic score doesn't scream Patriots QB...to me at least.

Click to expand...

You can't compare him to Brady though. When we've drafted QBs in the past, it was for the #2 spot. This might be different. He might have attributes that BB can work with if he rises to a starting spot, attributes that differ from what they may look for in a guy drafted to be a backup.

The good news is we'll have some clarity soon.

Rico Guapo said:

Inaccurate passer with a low wonderlic score doesn't scream Patriots QB...to me at least.

Click to expand...

Ignoring Wonderlic, which I don't think the Patriots give a shit about since it's a garbage test.
He had a 59.1 completion percentage, Brady and Garropolo both were at 61 as Juniors (Brisset was at 59.7). I really doubt a 1-2% difference matters to them (especially considering the much higher LOC vs, Jimmy G).

He seems very much a Patriots type player, incredible college production, team captain, played in a pro offense (in this case the same base the Patriots use), had some of the best numbers downfield and under pressure of this class. He's a different type of Qb than Brady, but he actually has a lot in common with the two most recently drafted QBs by the Patriots.

DrewDawg said:

You can't compare him to Brady though. When we've drafted QBs in the past, it was for the #2 spot. This might be different. He might have attributes that BB can work with if he rises to a starting spot, attributes that differ from what they may look for in a guy drafted to be a backup.

The good news is we'll have some clarity soon.

Click to expand...

I am not opposed to drafting a developmental QB but in my opinion it's not a good allocation of resources to use a first round pick on said QB when the team has large needs at LT and LB/Edge.

Cellar-Door said:

Ignoring Wonderlic, which I don't think the Patriots give a shit about since it's a garbage test.
He had a 59.1 completion percentage, Brady and Garropolo both were at 61 as Juniors (Brisset was at 59.7). I really doubt a 1-2% difference matters to them (especially considering the much higher LOC vs, Jimmy G).

He seems very much a Patriots type player, incredible college production, team captain, played in a pro offense (in this case the same base the Patriots use), had some of the best numbers downfield and under pressure of this class. He's a different type of Qb than Brady, but he actually has a lot in common with the two most recently drafted QBs by the Patriots.

Click to expand...

Can’t speak for others, but my excitement is rooted in this: if they want him — IF — it will mean the Pats are highly confident they can effectively address the accuracy issues and everything else raised by the great Polian (who got basic facts wrong — like his height — and who I still suspect was doing the bidding of another team that is interested in Lamar). That confidence would be absolutely essential because people can mock draft till the cows come home, he likely is not lasting beyond 15.

I’d buy the confidence, and when you add all the other dimensions he brings to the offense, you cannot not be excited. If they want him and they are right, he will be electrifying — unlike any player we’ve had here in terms of athleticism.

tims4wins said:

I mean that'd be really smart but who is gonna trade up to 4? Buffalo??

Click to expand...

If Cleveland takes a QB at 1, the NYG go Barkley at 2, and the NYJ go QB at 3, then anyone thinking that Denver might go QB might try to get to 4 to grab QB-3. And if Den thinks that that possibility is likely, they might even trade up to 4 (cf Chicago last year).