2019 Pats: Roster Projection 1.0

Status
Not open for further replies.

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,737
I don't know what the cost savings would be by keeping Bailey over Allen, but so far Bailey seems to be perfectly solid.

The Pats simply have too many good players, and it will be a shame to see some of them go. I definitely see some trades happening, for either draft picks (hey can't ever have too many of those!) or for a player they want more. I still see a move for a TE as possible.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Bedard had an interesting approach to the roster construction argument this morning on BSJ. It’s behind the paywall so I won’t link to it, but the gist was that there are only 11 spots open, relative to the Super Bowl roster and each of those 11 has an obvious 1-for-1 replacement on hand (e.g. Chris Harris becomes N’Keal Henry).
So in order for some of these young guys to make the roster, it will mean cutting some guys who are returnees from last year.
Now there was some dead weight there so there are a decent sized handful of guys who likely get cut (eg Stephen Anderson, Ufomba Kamalu).
After that, you are looking at dumping some pretty productive returnees (Duron Harmon, Ted Karras, et al).

My take is that we are going to see an unusual number of trades with players going out and draft picks coming back.
 

TomTerrific

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,372
Wayland, MA
Bedard had an interesting approach to the roster construction argument this morning on BSJ. It’s behind the paywall so I won’t link to it, but the gist was that there are only 11 spots open, relative to the Super Bowl roster and each of those 11 has an obvious 1-for-1 replacement on hand (e.g. Chris Harris becomes N’Keal Henry).
Wow, so we could have two guys named N'Keal on our roster at the same time? What are the chances of that?:D
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,737
Bedard had an interesting approach to the roster construction argument this morning on BSJ. It’s behind the paywall so I won’t link to it, but the gist was that there are only 11 spots open, relative to the Super Bowl roster and each of those 11 has an obvious 1-for-1 replacement on hand (e.g. Chris Harris becomes N’Keal Henry).
So in order for some of these young guys to make the roster, it will mean cutting some guys who are returnees from last year.
Now there was some dead weight there so there are a decent sized handful of guys who likely get cut (eg Stephen Anderson, Ufomba Kamalu).
After that, you are looking at dumping some pretty productive returnees (Duron Harmon, Ted Karras, et al).

My take is that we are going to see an unusual number of trades with players going out and draft picks coming back.
It's a great problem to have - too many good players that you can't keep them all - but it will be painful to see some of these guys performing really well on other teams. Can't we just find a way to horde them all?????
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,229
I don't know what the cost savings would be by keeping Bailey over Allen, but so far Bailey seems to be perfectly solid.

The Pats simply have too many good players, and it will be a shame to see some of them go. I definitely see some trades happening, for either draft picks (hey can't ever have too many of those!) or for a player they want more. I still see a move for a TE as possible.
It's a bit over a million bucks in savings this season.

Plus Bailey is under contract for three more years after this for a total of 2 million and Allen is a UFA after the season.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
Kyed's analysis: https://nesn.com/2019/08/patriots-53-man-roster-locks-include-just-27-veteran-players-six-rookies/

Perhaps most interesting is putting Deatrich Wise on the bubble:
View: https://twitter.com/DougKyed/status/1160536270256443392


"Patriots seem to be changing their defense, and I'm not sure how Wise fits into a three-man front. He's more of a prototypical seven-tech."

I think Wise ultimately makes it, but I don't think he's crazy. We probably shouldn't see Wise as a lock. Interesting, while many / most starters got Thursday off, the only DL who didn't play were Bennett and Guy.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,100
Hingham, MA
Kyed's analysis: https://nesn.com/2019/08/patriots-53-man-roster-locks-include-just-27-veteran-players-six-rookies/

Perhaps most interesting is putting Deatrich Wise on the bubble:
View: https://twitter.com/DougKyed/status/1160536270256443392


"Patriots seem to be changing their defense, and I'm not sure how Wise fits into a three-man front. He's more of a prototypical seven-tech."

I think Wise ultimately makes it, but I don't think he's crazy. We probably shouldn't see Wise as a lock. Interesting, while many / most starters got Thursday off, the only DL who didn't play were Bennett and Guy.
Very interesting. On Friday morning my dad said to me “I don’t get why Wise is a lock”.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
Very interesting. On Friday morning my dad said to me “I don’t get why Wise is a lock”.
There are only four DL or edge with more than $500 in dead money: Bennett, Guy, John Simon, and Winovich. Pennel, Rivers, Cowart, and Wise are the only other guys with even $100K in guarantees. And Shelton ($75K) and Butler ($2K) are the only others with any guaranteed money. It's really wide open in the front 3/4.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,100
Hingham, MA
Etling cut, not that he was making the team

Mike Reiss

@MikeReiss

·
3m

Per
@FieldYates
, WR/QB Danny Etling has been waived by the Patriots. Etling isn’t here at practice this morning. Etling was attempting to make the transition to a WR/special teams type role and was one of the fun stories of camp.
 

Pxer

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2007
1,414
Maine
Harmon was on the radio yesterday talking about how he has been working in the offseason to learn more of the SS role and the team has he him playing some more of that type of role in camp. I really don't think he's getting traded as he is Chung insurance for injury/decline as well as FS backup and getting run in 3 S sets.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,936
deep inside Guido territory
Harmon was on the radio yesterday talking about how he has been working in the offseason to learn more of the SS role and the team has he him playing some more of that type of role in camp. I really don't think he's getting traded as he is Chung insurance for injury/decline as well as FS backup and getting run in 3 S sets.
They've been having some corners play safety in camp as well. I wouldn't call Harmon a roster lock.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Etling cut, not that he was making the team

Mike Reiss
@MikeReiss

·
3m

Per
@FieldYates
, WR/QB Danny Etling has been waived by the Patriots. Etling isn’t here at practice this morning. Etling was attempting to make the transition to a WR/special teams type role and was one of the fun stories of camp.
They need roster spots for guys coming from PUP or for new acquisitions.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
Etling cut, not that he was making the team
He wasn't, but I was curious whether he did enough different things that he might be a useful scout team / practice squad player. I guess not.

They've been having some corners play safety in camp as well. I wouldn't call Harmon a roster lock.
I don't think the corners playing safety affects Harmon's status. They're going to want a third safety as the primary backup, and a CB moving over to safety will be an emergency option or a useful adjustment within the play (like JMac's breakup in the Super Bowl). What could put Harmon in jeopardy is if they decide Brooks and / or Melifonwu is just as good or nearly as good at FS; he's getting paid too much to be the fourth S.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,936
deep inside Guido territory
He wasn't, but I was curious whether he did enough different things that he might be a useful scout team / practice squad player. I guess not.


I don't think the corners playing safety affects Harmon's status. They're going to want a third safety as the primary backup, and a CB moving over to safety will be an emergency option or a useful adjustment within the play (like JMac's breakup in the Super Bowl). What could put Harmon in jeopardy is if they decide Brooks and / or Melifonwu is just as good or nearly as good at FS; he's getting paid too much to be the fourth S.
They played Jon Jones at safety in the AFC title game and Super Bowl over Harmon until Chung got hurt. If one of the corners proves to be good enough to take Harmon's reps they could cut him, save money, and also possibly not have to cut a corner they really like. In my initial projection, I have Jon Jones listed at safety with Brooks and Melifonwu on the roster as well.

What may be a way to keep Harmon plus Brooks and Melifonwu is cutting/trading Dawson. Dawson is struggling a lot which may bring that into fruition.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,228
Providence, RI
Cutting him gives him a chance to latch on elsewhere but if not does he get a practice squad spot? Or will they stick stidham there?
You really think that Stidham, a guy picked in this year’s 4th round by a team that has a strong history of developing QBs and who played great in his preseason debut, would not get claimed immediately if the pats cut him? That’s just silly. Stidham will be on the 53 man roster. There is no possibility that the pats could get him through waivers so that they could then resign him to the practice squad. Zero. None.

Eitling is irrelevant as a QB now that Stidham is here so why would they waste a practice squad spot on him? I guess maybe if they thought he could actually some day make it as a we. But reports from camp were that he was a long long way off. His nfl career is likely done.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,100
Hingham, MA
I think the only way Etling makes PS is if they cut Hoyer. I think they would want 3 QBs for practices just so that they don’t overly tax Brady during drills and such for other skill players.
And speaking of, what are the chances this happens? Back in 2014, the Pats traded Mallett right at the end of preseason because they had seen enough of Jimmy G.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,936
deep inside Guido territory
And speaking of, what are the chances this happens? Back in 2014, the Pats traded Mallett right at the end of preseason because they had seen enough of Jimmy G.
If anything, they'll try to trade Hoyer. Spotrac has a post 6/1 trade of Hoyer saving the Pats $2.8 million on this year's cap and just $1.3 million in savings if they release him.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,483
I would think Hoyer gets traded rather than cut. Backup QB's with real game experience have some value to a team that finds itself shorthanded due to an injury situation.

The writing was on the wall with Etling once they drafted Stidham. Maybe he's back on the practice squad, but I'm not sure the Pats view him as even backup material, so he would be at best just a practice body. Stidham will not clear waivers, so he will not get placed on the PS.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,100
Hingham, MA
If anything, they'll try to trade Hoyer. Spotrac has a post 6/1 trade of Hoyer saving the Pats $2.8 million on this year's cap and just $1.3 million in savings if they release him.
I would think Hoyer gets traded rather than cut. Backup QB's with real game experience have some value to a team that finds itself shorthanded due to an injury situation.

The writing was on the wall with Etling once they drafted Stidham. Maybe he's back on the practice squad, but I'm not sure the Pats view him as even backup material, so he would be at best just a practice body. Stidham will not clear waivers, so he will not get placed on the PS.
Good points
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
They played Jon Jones at safety in the AFC title game and Super Bowl over Harmon until Chung got hurt. If one of the corners proves to be good enough to take Harmon's reps they could cut him, save money, and also possibly not have to cut a corner they really like. In my initial projection, I have Jon Jones listed at safety with Brooks and Melifonwu on the roster as well.
This didn't fit with my memory so I watched a fair amount of both games on all-22. Jones didn't play safety in the AFCCG - he was the man-to-man matchup on Tyreek Hill (with safety help over the top). He did play a lot of safety in the SB, in a combination of quarters and in an underneath zone in C3. I did not see him play deep one-high at all. So Jones at S is probably something we could see on a matchup basis or in a pinch, but I don't see him displacing Harmon.

What may be a way to keep Harmon plus Brooks and Melifonwu is cutting/trading Dawson. Dawson is struggling a lot which may bring that into fruition.
This is where I'm at, at least as of now. Dawson will get every chance to make the roster, but he seems to be struggling while too many other guys are playing well. Ebner returning also muddies the waters a bit, though he is really only a S in name only and shouldn't really factor into the DB discussion.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,936
deep inside Guido territory
This didn't fit with my memory so I watched a fair amount of both games on all-22. Jones didn't play safety in the AFCCG - he was the man-to-man matchup on Tyreek Hill (with safety help over the top). He did play a lot of safety in the SB, in a combination of quarters and in an underneath zone in C3. I did not see him play deep one-high at all. So Jones at S is probably something we could see on a matchup basis or in a pinch, but I don't see him displacing Harmon.


This is where I'm at, at least as of now. Dawson will get every chance to make the roster, but he seems to be struggling while too many other guys are playing well. Ebner returning also muddies the waters a bit, though he is really only a S in name only and shouldn't really factor into the DB discussion.
I seemed to remember Jones playing safety for Harmon but I guess it was just the Super Bowl. I looked back at the snap counts and Chung was 52/52, DMC 50/52, and Harmon 2/52 so basically they played the entire game with 2 safeties. 4 corners(Gilmore, JMC, Jones, and Jackson) played at least 35/52. Did they just play Devin McCourty at single high safety all game with Chung closer to the LOS/helping on Kelce?
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
60,164
Oregon
A huge quarry of salt because it was Tannenbaum, but he suggested on ESPN that if Stidham showed enough to be a legit No. 2 immediately, a landing spot for Hoyer could be Philly
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
I seemed to remember Jones playing safety for Harmon but I guess it was just the Super Bowl. I looked back at the snap counts and Chung was 52/52, DMC 50/52, and Harmon 2/52 so basically they played the entire game with 2 safeties. 4 corners(Gilmore, JMC, Jones, and Jackson) played at least 35/52. Did they just play Devin McCourty at single high safety all game with Chung closer to the LOS/helping on Kelce?
They treated Kelce like a WR. IIRC they had Jackson on him in the first half and switched Gilmore onto him in the second after he lit up Jackson a bit. Chung kind of did a bit of everything - sometimes on the RB, sometimes on second TE Demetrius Harris, sometimes on the edge or in the slot.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,317
A huge quarry of salt because it was Tannenbaum, but he suggested on ESPN that if Stidham showed enough to be a legit No. 2 immediately, a landing spot for Hoyer could be Philly
Indy could be worth watching too. This Luck stuff is starting to sound ominous.
 

finnVT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2002
1,830
Detroit after Savage went down would seem like an ideal landing spot for Hoyer (between Patricia's familiarity with him and having just had an up-close view), but they signed Josh Johnson instead. Which may be an indication the Pats aren't ready to make Stidham their #2 just yet (or just that the Lions aren't interested, of course).
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
Detroit after Savage went down would seem like an ideal landing spot for Hoyer (between Patricia's familiarity with him and having just had an up-close view), but they signed Josh Johnson instead. Which may be an indication the Pats aren't ready to make Stidham their #2 just yet (or just that the Lions aren't interested, of course).
There's no rush from the Patriots' end to make a deal. Maybe Brady gets hurt next week, or maybe Stidham does. Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it couldn't, and I don't think Josh Johnson materially changes the picture from Detroit's end.
 

JMDurron

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,714
Montgomery, Alabama
Detroit after Savage went down would seem like an ideal landing spot for Hoyer (between Patricia's familiarity with him and having just had an up-close view), but they signed Josh Johnson instead. Which may be an indication the Pats aren't ready to make Stidham their #2 just yet (or just that the Lions aren't interested, of course).
Stidham would have to have genius-level football smarts to be able to translate from the offense he started in at Auburn to picking up the Patriots' offense quickly enough and thoroughly enough to be designated the #2 QB coming out of the preseason. Even Tom Brady, coming out of a Michigan offense that was far closer to "pro style" at the time than Auburn's is today, needed a full year as #4 before he was trusted enough to be the #2 in 2001. I would be completely astounded if Stidham becomes the #2 in 2019, barring an injury to someone ahead of him on the depth chart.

He may very well be capable of making this translation effectively, I don't mean to come off as down on his long-term potential, but I think the brakes need to be pumped on any "Stidham as #2 in 2019" thinking.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
Stidham would have to have genius-level football smarts to be able to translate from the offense he started in at Auburn to picking up the Patriots' offense quickly enough and thoroughly enough to be designated the #2 QB coming out of the preseason. Even Tom Brady, coming out of a Michigan offense that was far closer to "pro style" at the time than Auburn's is today, needed a full year as #4 before he was trusted enough to be the #2 in 2001. I would be completely astounded if Stidham becomes the #2 in 2019, barring an injury to someone ahead of him on the depth chart.

He may very well be capable of making this translation effectively, I don't mean to come off as down on his long-term potential, but I think the brakes need to be pumped on any "Stidham as #2 in 2019" thinking.
They did it with Jimmy Garoppolo, coming from a spread-type offense at a lower level of competition. They also did it with Brian Hoyer as a UDFA coming off a terrible final college season and with Ryan Mallett even though he's bad. I'm probably more with you that they'll keep Hoyer and leave Stidham as #3, but it would hardly be unprecedented if they moved on from Hoyer and left Stidham as the sole backup.
 

JMDurron

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,714
Montgomery, Alabama
They did it with Jimmy Garoppolo, coming from a spread-type offense at a lower level of competition. They also did it with Brian Hoyer as a UDFA coming off a terrible final college season and with Ryan Mallett even though he's bad. I'm probably more with you that they'll keep Hoyer and leave Stidham as #3, but it would hardly be unprecedented if they moved on from Hoyer and left Stidham as the sole backup.
That's interesting. I wasn't aware of these precedents, but I'm a little hesitant to accept them as direct analogues to Stidham.

I'm not having any luck looking up Garoppolo on reference.com, but at least Ryan Mallett was playing in (as I understand it) more of a pro-style offense at Arkansas, while outperforming Hoyer and Stidham during his final season, with more attempts (411 vs 369 for Stidham) to boot. Auburn's offense being spead-run focused (I'm making up terms here, I hope my general meaning gets across) is worth considering when comparing the scope of Stidham's translation challenge. Was Garoppolo's spread-type offense more passing-based? Given that Hoyer came out of Michigan State, I would have to assume that the "understanding a pro-style offense" conceptual jump would also be far smaller in his case than it likely is for Stidham.

I'll admit that my biased thinking on Auburn's offense under Malzahn is a factor here - that Stidham may also need to transition up from being coached by an inflexible one-trick pony of an offensive mind who didn't know what to do with a pocket-passing QB like him to begin with.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
That's interesting. I wasn't aware of these precedents, but I'm a little hesitant to accept them as direct analogues to Stidham.

I'm not having any luck looking up Garoppolo on reference.com, but at least Ryan Mallett was playing in (as I understand it) more of a pro-style offense at Arkansas, while outperforming Hoyer and Stidham during his final season, with more attempts (411 vs 369 for Stidham) to boot. Auburn's offense being spead-run focused (I'm making up terms here, I hope my general meaning gets across) is worth considering when comparing the scope of Stidham's translation challenge. Was Garoppolo's spread-type offense more passing-based? Given that Hoyer came out of Michigan State, I would have to assume that the "understanding a pro-style offense" conceptual jump would also be far smaller in his case than it likely is for Stidham.

I'll admit that my biased thinking on Auburn's offense under Malzahn is a factor here - that Stidham may also need to transition up from being coached by an inflexible one-trick pony of an offensive mind who didn't know what to do with a pocket-passing QB like him to begin with.
My mistake: Mallett was third string his rookie year, they didn't get rid of Hoyer until Y2 (cutting him while on a RFA tender IIRC).

You can't find Garoppolo's stats on PFRef because he played at the FCS level. We can quibble about whether Hoyer putting up bad numbers in a pro-style run-heavy offense in a P5 conference or Garoppolo putting up great numbers against bad competition in a pass-heavy spread or Stidham putting up OK numbers in a run-heavy spread in the SEC makes one of them more pro-ready than the other. To me, it's splitting hairs: none had ideal backgrounds to take the #2 backup QB job as a rookie, but Hoyer and Jimmy G did anyway. We'll see about Stidham. Some of it will come down to how comfortable they feel with Brady getting through 16 games as a 42-year-old.
 

mwonow

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
4,994
Here's how it looks to me, before adds/subtracts (trades, waiver claims, injuries) between now and final cutdown day:

QB (3) T.Brady, B.Hoyer, J.Stidham
RB (5) S.Michel, J.Develin, R.Burkhead, J.White, B.Bolden
WR (7) J.Edelman, N.Harry, M.Harris, B.Berrios, M.Slater, J.Meyers, P.Dorsett
TE (2) L.Kendricks, TBD
C (1) D.Andrews
G (4) S.Mason, J.Thuney, H.Froholdt, T.Karras
T (2) M.Cannon, I.Wynn
DE (6) M.Bennett, D.Wise, C.Winovich, S.Calhoun, J.Simon, D.Rivers
DT (4) L.Guy, M.Pennel, A.Butler, D.Shelton
ILB(1) J.Bentley
OLB(4) D.Hightower, K.VanNoy, J.Collins, B.King
CB (6) S.Gilmore, J.Jackson, J.McCourty, J.Jones, J.Williams, K.Crossen
SS (2) P.Chung, N.Ebner
FS (3) D.McCourty, T.Brooks, D.Harmon
ST (3) S.Gostkowski, J.Cardona, J.Bailey

Watson suspended for first four games
LaCosse could be the TBD TE, or could be IR with a newbie signed, or could just get cut for a newb.
Thuney backs up tackle and Karras backs up center, but I think they'll keep Ferentz if they can find room
I have Harris (RB) starting the year on IR; Cajuste on PUP (Webster too, or is he back?); Thomas too, though if he comes off, one of the other WRs (Dorsett?) shifts to IR
Dawson traded, maybe Roberts as well
I didn't want to cut Obi, but there wasn't another spot open

Total players: 53
Created with Pats Picker: http://patsfans.com/patspicker
 
Last edited:

Pxer

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2007
1,414
Maine
I like that projection. Perhaps leave off the 2nd TE to make room for a other OL (they probably can get away with 7, with someone stashed on PS) or Dawson or Melifonwu. Also, did Damian Harris go to IR or was that a bed dream I had? I know he was dealing with a minor hand issue.

I agree Robert's seems like an obvious trade candidate barring an LB injury.

Really hope the D lives us to the potential!
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It seems like every year, there is a surprise departure, either by trade or release. Oftentimes one of their off-season new acquisitions whom everyone anticipated being a great pickup.
Meanwhile there is another guy who seems to have lost it, who manages to stick around defying expectations.

My guesses:
Unexpected departure: Mike Pennel
Unexpected remaining: Elandon Roberts
 

mwonow

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
4,994
It seems like every year, there is a surprise departure, either by trade or release. Oftentimes one of their off-season new acquisitions whom everyone anticipated being a great pickup.
Meanwhile there is another guy who seems to have lost it, who manages to stick around defying expectations.

My guesses:
Unexpected departure: Mike Pennel
Unexpected remaining: Elandon Roberts
Is that the Jordan Richards Memorial roster spot?
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,237
Maine
I thought Pennel had been raved about through the entire camp and after the Detroit "game".

and the only quibble I would have with @mwonow projection is that I dont see how they keep 10 DT/DE and only 7 OL.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
16,355
Philadelphia
I thought Pennel had been raved about through the entire camp and after the Detroit "game".

and the only quibble I would have with @mwonow projection is that I dont see how they keep 10 DT/DE and only 7 OL.
I haven't been following camp stories that closely but in theory I'd think 7 OL is OK as long as there are at least 2 TE, with the plan that everybody is on the 46 man game day roster and your depth is on the practice squad. Without the two TE, not only do your offensive personnel groupings get predictable but the numbers on the FG unit start to become kind of tricky and very injury-sensitive. You need eight guys plus the LS on the line for the FG unit and while you can sneak a DT in there - Guy played a lot last year - you don't want to have too many non-OL/TE types or you're going to start getting kicks blocked. Andrews generally doesn't play on that unit and is just replaced by the LS so if you only had 7 OL and 1 TE dressing you're talking about using all seven of the OL/TE guys plus Guy as your regular FG team, which works until somebody gets hurt.

My bigger question regarding OL would be how confident they are that they can keep Skipper if he is moved to the practice squad. I realize that he as bounced from practice squad to practice squad so maybe there isn't much league interest in him. But if he is your tackle depth (beyond Thuney moonlighting) and somebody grabs him, all of a sudden you've got no tackle depth.
 

Zedia

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
3,449
Pasadena, CA
Even if Thuney could be a long-term answer to an OT injury, I can't imagine they'd only have 2 pure tackles on the 46 man roster, nevermind the 53. I can't find a history of game day scratches, but my recollection is that they always dress a swing tackle.
 

mwonow

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
4,994
Those are good points - I just couldn't hit 'cut' on any of the DEs listed above. An injury (DE or WR) would open up a spot for a swing tackle, as would the trade of a DE
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
I watched the first four series and charted the defensive substitution patterns to get a feel for how the D might look this year (and what it might tell us about roster spots). They came out in a 2-4 look with two down linemen (Shelton and Butler), two OLBs up on this line (Simon and Calhoun), and two off-ball LBs (Collins and Bentley). When they switched to a 3-4 (mostly on the second and third drives) they added Wise or Keionta Davis as a down lineman, took off Calhoun and moved Collins up to on the line, and brought in Roberts. On passing downs, they went to one down lineman (Butler) and had four standup LBs on the line (Collins, Calhoun, Bentley, and Rivers). Brandon King came in to play off-ball LB. On the third series, Pennel subbed in for Shelton, and they went to a 3-3 with Wise / Pennel / Butler or Wise / Pennel / Calhoun, with Calhoun or Rivers playing a standup end and Roberts and Calvin Munson off-ball.

So I guess for roles:
DL: Butler played almost every snap in 3, 2, and 1 man lines. Shelton or Pennel played on 2 and 3 man lines. Wise or Davis played on 3-man lines. Guy didn't play but I'm guessing he'd be in the Shelton / Pennel role. Bennett maybe fills the role Butler did?
On-ball OLBs: Simon played in 3 and 2 man lines. Calhoun played in 2 and 1 man lines and got the odd rep at DL. Collins rotated down in base. Rivers played mostly in 1-man lines as a pure pass rusher but rotated in as a standup end or DL in 3-3 fronts. Presumably Van Noy and Hightower might rotate down like Collins did.
Off-ball LBs: Collins played off-ball in 2-man lines, rotated down in 1-man and 3-man lines. Bentley and Roberts off-ball in 2-man and 3-man lines, rotated down in 1-man lines. King off-ball in 1-man lines. Presumably Van Noy and Hightower are the starters here.

Roster implications:
  • If they're only playing one big DL (along with a guy like Butler or maybe Bennett), I can't see three roster spots for Guy, Shelton, and Pennel. I think Guy is a lock and Shelton and Pennel are competing for one spot. But I guess we could see two big DLs against run-heavy teams (and thus would need three)?
  • Wise is kind of playing a different role than Rivers / Calhoun / Winovich. But he still might be squeezed out by Bennett / Butler. There were not a lot of snaps for him in the first quarter Thursday night; he didn't play in nickel. And if they think Wise won't play much anyway, he could be squeezed out by Cowart, who they probably can't sneak onto the PS.
  • Simon is a lock and I feel dumb for not including him on my initial projection. How many other roster spots are there for edge guys, though? Rivers played ahead of Winovich, but Winovich is a lock, and he's behind Simon and Calhoun. Collins took a lot of snaps that would have gone to a more conventional edge guy; I have to imagine that only gets worse when Van Noy and Hightower are playing.
  • Roberts wasn't part of the nickel D even without Hightower and Van Noy
I'll wait until my next projection to make predictions, but I'd put Shelton, Pennel, Rivers, Wise, and Roberts on the bubble.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,229
Those are good points - I just couldn't hit 'cut' on any of the DEs listed above. An injury (DE or WR) would open up a spot for a swing tackle, as would the trade of a DE
I'd cut Rivers for an OL, probably Ferentz.

You'd also have to cut someone else to make a spot for Harris. If he goes on IR before making the opening day roster, he can't come back this season.
 

Zedia

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
3,449
Pasadena, CA
Just for posterity, I made one - I think I would lose one of Ebner/Obi/Brooks for Berrios, but I couldn't decide.

QB (2) T.Brady, J.Stidham
RB (6) S.Michel, J.White, D.Harris, B.Bolden, R.Burkhead, J.Develin
WR (6) J.Edelman, P.Dorsett, M.Slater, M.Harris, J.Meyers, N.Harry
TE (2) L.Kendricks, M.LaCosse
C (1) D.Andrews
G (4) S.Mason, H.Froholdt, T.Karras, J.Thuney
T (3) M.Cannon, D.Skipper, I.Wynn
DE (5) M.Bennett, C.Winovich, S.Calhoun, J.Simon, D.Wise
DT (3) L.Guy, A.Butler, M.Pennel
ILB(2) J.Bentley, E.Roberts
OLB(4) D.Hightower, K.VanNoy, B.King, J.Collins
CB (6) S.Gilmore, J.Jackson, J.Williams, J.Jones, K.Crossen, J.McCourty
SS (3) N.Ebner, P.Chung, O.Melifonwu
FS (3) D.McCourty, T.Brooks, D.Harmon
ST (3) S.Gostkowski, J.Bailey, J.Cardona

Total players: 53
Created with Pats Picker: http://patsfans.com/patspicker
 
Status
Not open for further replies.