The NFLPA website takes a couple days after the transactions go onto the wire to include those deals, yeah. Miguel is usually right on the money, give or take a few hundred thousand. Basically, given some sort of resolution to the Wilfork situation or a release of Connolly, they are running out of room.Ed Hillel said:
The draft position point is fair, but I think it depends on where we draw the line of "good." Take Tavon Austin: he showed flashes at times and I don't think the Rams regret picking him, but he only had 418 receiving yards last year. He was a useful player, but I would say he wasn't yet "good." I would say none of the Patriots' rookies were "good," though certainly several of them contributed and / or showed promise.bakahump said:
Can be had, yes. Will be had, maybe. It's true you can get some of the highest-rated interior OL in the mid-rounds, but you still have the problems that 1) the highest-rated draftees don't always become the best players, and 2) the best players aren't always good as rookies. I count 10 interior OL taken in the 3rd and 4th rounds last year; only one was a good regular - and that was Larry Warford, who was the highest-selected in that group. The Pats made Rich Ohrnberger the 4th guard drafted in 2009; he never started a game for us.bakahump said:
I wouldn't be surprised in they got a DT, TE, and C who eventually became good regulars. I would be surprised if they were all good regulars as rookies. Fortunately, they probably won't need to be; Gronk will be back at some point and they have other options at DT. Even at C, they have the option to move Connolly to C and play Cannon at RG.bakahump said:
dcmissle said:
Wilfork started just 6 games because the Pats had a vet in Keith Traylor split time with him. Vollmer was a similar story; he started his career as a third tackle and subbed for Light and Kaczur as needed (Solder played the same role his rookie year). Mankins was plug-and-play from the get-go; of course, they shifted him from the more challenging LT position he played in college to LG. These guys were all high picks, too. You might figure you can plug in a good college OL like Martin, Su'a-Filo, or Bitonio at RG and be OK, but if you're just figuring to grab an OL in the 3rd or 4th round, he's most likely not going to be ready day 1.dcmissle said:
dcmissle said:
tims4wins said:
MentalDisabldLst said:
bankshot1 said:
I'm guessing you mean someone other than Jones. The chart's also missing first-round-but-not-first-picks Ben Watson (who only played one game as a rookie) and Hightower. There are also guys like Dowling, Chung, Chad Jackson, and Eugene Wilson who were second-rounders but in the first handful of picks. They seem like they'd be part of the relevant data set if we're trying to guess the kind of value the Pats can expect at 29.MentalDisabldLst said:
It's not about going back to prove a point - it's about looking at the complete data set. Even if we add Klemm, we still only get to 5 OL the Pats have drafted in the first two rounds in BB's tenure. I won't argue that they hit on 4 of 5 (the 4 most recent), but I have a hard time projecting that to continue in the future based on such a tiny sample set. Ditto your distrust for the FO's ability to draft WR and CBs.dcmissle said:
I'd even say he's better than average.Shelterdog said:
They were ok. Maroney reminded me of Dice-k, lot of talent but he always seemed hesitant and didn't quite trust his stuff.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
bankshot1 said:
The idea isn't ridiculous, but there isn't a C like that in this draft. I've seen Marcus Martin (USC), Travis Swanson (Arkansas), and Weston Richburg (CO State) all listed as the #1 C prospect by someone or other, but you can find sources that will rank any of these guys as 4th-5th rounders. C typically requires the least physical skill of any of the OL positions, so it's not surprising that they are rarely drafted early.Saints Rest said:
BigSoxFan said:
Stitch01 said:
Ralphwiggum said:
