2023 Pats: Offseason

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,950
Isle of Plum
I'm not sure Flores was better but his defenses did seem to be a little more aggressive and that's more fun to watch as a fan. And Flores is also very good.

That Super Bowl was bad--and lord knows what happened with Butler--but looking back at the snap count holy cow that was a talentless defensive unit. James Harrison's corpse playing 91 percent of the snaps? Trey Flowers and Van Noy were both decent enough and got money in free agency but when those guys are your best defensive front seven players and are playing a hundred percent of the snaps you don't have a good front seven. Malcom Brown and Guy played huge minutes; Ricky Francois started the game.

My overall take on the Pats of the 2010s is they were generally speaking able to get very good defensive performances out of smart solid coaching, help from an offense that didn't turn it over and good special teams, a couple of actually underrated players (DMac, Hightower--in schemes where they could get better numbers those guys could have been consistent all pros IMO) but overall cruddy talent. Patricia and Flores were big parts of that (BB probably being the biggest from the coaching standpoint).
I do credit Patricia for helping evolve their overall process as DC. I wish I could find the link, but I recall reading he helped drive the adoption of tech like tablets and analytics, where Bill was still a film room guy. I also believe that D wasn't exactly overachieving its talent under his watch, but my perception is they were VERY two gap centric in technique and personnel at the beginning of the '10s but by the end were much more multiple, and I think that may have been his influence as well. I know, hard to distinguish from Bill, and I'm not a Patricia fan, but there you go.

Edit....Patricia helped modernize the Patriots’ film process in his first season in 2004. In New England, Patricia helped modernize the Patriots’ film process in his first season in 2004. He put in regular 20-hour days that endeared him to Belichick and others, and friend and former teammate Scott Sasenbury said "that was probably one of his early successes" in New England.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,991
Newton
I'm not sure Flores was better but his defenses did seem to be a little more aggressive and that's more fun to watch as a fan. And Flores is also very good.

That Super Bowl was bad--and lord knows what happened with Butler--but looking back at the snap count holy cow that was a talentless defensive unit. James Harrison's corpse playing 91 percent of the snaps? Trey Flowers and Van Noy were both decent enough and got money in free agency but when those guys are your best defensive front seven players and are playing a hundred percent of the snaps you don't have a good front seven. Malcom Brown and Guy played huge minutes; Ricky Francois started the game.
I think we also have some recency bias with Patricia's defense because of 2017 (much like we do with Ainge/Stevens for their 2020-21 team). It was the last Patriots defense he coached and they massively underperformed expectations, especially early on and then late after injuries caught up. Going into that season, people wondered if the defense might be all-time great having just signed Gilmore to big dollars -- then, they got torched by the Chiefs in the first game and were the worst defense in the league for the first four games and Gilmore was almost benched against Carolina before someone else got hurt. But they ended up ranking 5th in points against and 4th in yards. The Hightower injury really hurt them.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Thanks, great stuff as always.
Wonder if Kincaid is a potential pick at 14 instead of a WR. They need receiving help but if the top 2-3 WRs don't test well Kincaid may be the better use of resources. I've seen him mocked anywhere from 10-28ish.
I would strongly consider him at 14 as a big slot who can block.

Some years I think there aren't a lot of good fits at the top. This year I think there are a ton of good fits at the top. If they want to go edge, they are like 3-4 guys there, 3-4 CBs, 2-3 DTs, 2-3 OTs, 2-3 TEs, 2-3 WRs, RB(s), maybe even an ILB. And not that they would want to go IOL but there are certainly a couple guys there too.

It's a good year for them. They could easily trade down too because there are a bunch of guys around the same tier of draft grade who are there from 14-25 or 30 or so.

If you ask me for certain types of prospects at a position I would be happy to give you summaries. I am familiar with 90 prospects super well and have done write-ups but know the top guys at the positions I have not done... so I know the DTs, CBs, Safeties, ILBs, RB, and QBs even though I haven't done a deep dive on them. I know OT, IOL, WR, TE, and Edge very well. The only QB I did a deep dive on is Anthony Richardson who I absolutely love but won't be there at 14.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
I do credit Patricia for helping evolve their overall process as DC. I wish I could find the link, but I recall reading he helped drive the adoption of tech like tablets and analytics, where Bill was still a film room guy. I also believe that D wasn't exactly overachieving its talent under his watch, but my perception is they were VERY two gap centric in technique and personnel at the beginning of the '10s but by the end were much more multiple, and I think that may have been his influence as well. I know, hard to distinguish from Bill, and I'm not a Patricia fan, but there you go.
To be clear I'm not a particular Patricia fan either--I don't think he's an amazing difference maker, I wasn't concerned about Flores's ability to replace him, and I'm not particularly surprised he struggled as a head coach simply because most people do--but I think he's a totally fine normal professional DC. What I do think is that people are massively underrating how skilled someone has to be to put together an NFL defensive scheme, game plan week by week, and call plays week by week at a professional level--even if it's just football it's a highly technical job requiring a lot of skill and ability.

For folks who think Patricia sucks or is otherwise something far short of an average to above average defensive coordinator, what is you explanation as to why Bill let him run the defense so long? And clearly Patricia was _not_ an average to above average offensive coordinator, and he got canned after one year in that role.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
I would strongly consider him at 14 as a big slot who can block.

Some years I think there aren't a lot of good fits at the top. This year I think there are a ton of good fits at the top. If they want to go edge, they are like 3-4 guys there, 3-4 CBs, 2-3 DTs, 2-3 OTs, 2-3 TEs, 2-3 WRs, RB(s), maybe even an ILB. And not that they would want to go IOL but there are certainly a couple guys there too.

It's a good year for them. They could easily trade down too because there are a bunch of guys around the same tier of draft grade who are there from 14-25 or 30 or so.

If you ask me for certain types of prospects at a position I would be happy to give you summaries. I am familiar with 90 prospects super well and have done write-ups but know the top guys at the positions I have not done... so I know the DTs, CBs, Safeties, ILBs, RB, and QBs even though I haven't done a deep dive on them. I know OT, IOL, WR, TE, and Edge very well. The only QB I did a deep dive on is Anthony Richardson who I absolutely love but won't be there at 14.
Seems like a very deep class at Edge/CB and generally poor WR class, where I'm seeing the most variance is at RB. Obviously everyone loves Bijan but after him the grades are all over the place. Gibbs is widely considered the second tier RB but he is seen by many as a pure gadget and pass catching back. Charbonet is considered the RB3 by most but I've seen him called James Connor lite, not exactly a ringing endorsement. My 2nd fav back I think is Bijan's running mate Rochon Johnson, curious what you are hearing/seeing about the RB class. Of course no group is impacted more by the combine than the RBs and WRs so everything in naturally subject to change, also might be better in the draft thread since outside of a day 3 pick I'd be surprised if NE invested heavily at RB again this yr even though the depth might make it a worthwhile investment.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,749
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
To be clear I'm not a particular Patricia fan either--I don't think he's an amazing difference maker, I wasn't concerned about Flores's ability to replace him, and I'm not particularly surprised he struggled as a head coach simply because most people do--but I think he's a totally fine normal professional DC. What I do think is that people are massively underrating how skilled someone has to be to put together an NFL defensive scheme, game plan week by week, and call plays week by week at a professional level--even if it's just football it's a highly technical job requiring a lot of skill and ability.

For folks who think Patricia sucks or is otherwise something far short of an average to above average defensive coordinator, what is you explanation as to why Bill let him run the defense so long? And clearly Patricia was _not_ an average to above average offensive coordinator, and he got canned after one year in that role.
He knew the system and Bill had a level of comfort with his playcalling he thought made him adequate at his job. I think he was below average and empirically the worst defensive coordinator they've had since 2000 (would be in the running for worst coordinator in general were it not for himself on the other side of the ball). The whole "it's hard to be a DC in the NFL" bit is kinda meaningless, I'm not judging him against myself or a high school coach, I'm comparing him to other people who had the exact same job description as he did. The defense was better before Patricia and has been better after he left.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas

Bowser

New Member
Sep 27, 2019
399
I would strongly consider him at 14 as a big slot who can block.
I'm a big fan of Kincaid, too, and definitely get the Kelce vibes from him, though he's a touch shorter/lighter. I'd love to trade into the early 20s for him, but I'm not sure he'll be there. Given all the potential fits, I'd love to see the Pats land another second or early third round pick. Other options in the first round:
  • Dawand Jones. Some mock drafts have him going in Round 2, but he looks like a top 25 player. He's just too impressive physically to slide out of Day 1.
  • Keion White. 6'5" 280 DE with spin moves and can run wheel routes with RBs. He's not super consistent, but so much upside.
  • Jahmyr Gibbs. Comparisons to Alvin Kamara. I know RB shouldn't be a priority, but he's explosive and runs routes out of the slot, too. Has to be a BOB favorite.
  • Darnell Washington. Another guy who's mocked in the second round but won't last that long, particularly if he runs in the 4.6s.
  • JSN. There's more value with positions other than WR, but he's probably going to run faster than people think ... and he could be a dominant slot WR who can RAC.
  • Anthony Richardson. He won't be there at 14, but I can dream, right?
I'm tempted to add Devon Witherspoon and Christian Gonzalez, too, but it seems like a long CB can be had on Day 2.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
He knew the system and Bill had a level of comfort with his playcalling he thought made him adequate at his job. I think he was below average and empirically the worst defensive coordinator they've had since 2000 (would be in the running for worst coordinator in general were it not for himself on the other side of the ball). The whole "it's hard to be a DC in the NFL" bit is kinda meaningless, I'm not judging him against myself or a high school coach, I'm comparing him to other people who had the exact same job description as he did. The defense was better before Patricia and has been better after he left.
Personally I think Pees was worse (and BB apparently agreed, firing Pees after 2009)--can't find the DVOA ratings for the Pees era easily and his conventional stats are better than I remember (I'm probably just fixating on the Ravens playoff loss). Pees also had some shaky shaky personnel in the later years as the secondary began to implode so there are reasons for the D not being so strong.

I'm also not buying the idea that BB put up with a bad defensive coordinator/play caller for 8 seasons because he had a level of comfort with Patricia but to each their own.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Strongly disagree with Dawand Jones as a top 25 guy. I have him as a third rounder.

Lance Z has him 56th
Bleacher Report//Brandon Thorn has him 73rd
Dane Brugler has him 52nd
PFF has him 88th

I am probably closest to PFF. He has absolutely no recovery, struggles as a run blocker because he can't get good leverage, and has below average foot speed. His balance is also not great. I think the range for him is back of the 2nd to middle of the 3rd. I would not want him anywhere near the top 25. He isn't athletic enough and will never be a good enough run blocker.

Edit: I think he is a starter and given his improvement from year to year and what I have read about his work ethic he might even develop into a quality one eventually. His margin for error though is so slim.
 
Last edited:

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,837
I don't get him. He had 712 yards total in 3 years at college with limited punt and kick return experience. He wasn't particularly good at either. He is slow. He isn't a dynamic route runner. He has a short catch radius. He doesn't have RAC ability. He was just a below average slot... in college. I guess he would be an ok PS slot option.
Good camp guy since he played in BoB offense and with Mac Jones? Don't know.

Saban called him a great ST player as well.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
Strongly disagree with Dawand Jones as a top 25 guy. I have him as a third rounder.

Lance Z has him 56th
Bleacher Report//Brandon Thorn has him 73rd
Dane Brugler has him 52nd
PFF has him 88th

I am probably closest to PFF. He has absolutely no recovery, struggles as a run blocker because he can't get good leverage, and has below average foot speed. His balance is also not great. I think the range for him is back of the 2nd to middle of the 3rd. I would not want him anywhere near the top 25. He isn't athletic enough and will never be a good enough run blocker.

Edit: I think he is a starter and given his improvement from year to year and what I have read about his work ethic he might even develop into a quality one eventually. His margin for error though is so slim.
PFF has been moving Dawand up since their draft guide came out. They have him all the way up to 44th on their big board now.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
PFF has been moving Dawand up since their draft guide came out. They have him all the way up to 44th on their big board now.
They just launched their draft guide a week ago or so though... I think it is more accurate than the big board. Unless of course they moved Darnell Wright from 145th to 44th back to 77th? And J Duncan isn't even in their guide but he is 84th on the board.

View: https://twitter.com/JohnALimberakis/status/1630724283117740033?s=20


I asked them to clarify.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
They just launched their draft guide a week ago or so though... I think it is more accurate than the big board. Unless of course they moved Darnell Wright from 145th to 44th back to 77th? And J Duncan isn't even in their guide but he is 84th on the board.

View: https://twitter.com/JohnALimberakis/status/1630724283117740033?s=20


I asked them to clarify.
I could be wrong.

I assumed the big board would be more current since they can move guys around easily. Once they've got the art/graphics on the draft guide I figure they would be much tougher to change.

FWIW Trevor Sikkema did his most recent mock draft yesterday, and he's using the players big board rank there.
 
Last edited:

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Honestly it's a moot point anyway. BB has only drafted OTs in the first 3 rounds who played LT and have really good athleticism including a very good short shuttle. Dawand has 1 start there and 170 total snaps. So sure I guess he could qualify but he is not the athletic profile Bill typically goes for top 50. Given there is a shortage of good tackles this year I assume he is going top 50-60 so I don't think he is on their board. I guarantee you he isn't going to test well and in particular won't have a good short shuttle.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
Chad Graff for the Athletic today reported that the Patriots prefer to address WR with a veteran player instead of using their 1st rounder at the position. Also, Graff suggested that the Patriots don't view the offensive line as a huge concern and are confident that play will improve.

It’s no secret that wide receiver is one of the Patriots’ biggest needs this offseason. The group underperformed last season, and New England’s best player at the position, Jakobi Meyers, is set to become a free agent in two weeks.

But one former team official who requested anonymity so as to avoid facing repercussions from management said the Patriots’ preference at this point would be to address the position with a veteran rather than using their first-round pick, No. 14 overall, on a receiver.
While finding a new right tackle remains a top priority for the Patriots this offseason, there’s a belief from some in the organization that the line shouldn’t be a huge concern and that improved play there is expected.

The Patriots are confident in left tackle Trent Brown and center David Andrews, and they have watched Michael Onwenu become one of the best right guards in the NFL. They’re confident that Cole Strange will improve in Year 2, especially now that he’ll have a position coach whose sole responsibility is working with the unit (after Matt Patricia also handled offensive play-calling duties a year ago).

The team also knows there were issues at right tackle for much of the season. If the Pats can get even average play from their next right tackle while having Strange play more consistently, they should have a good front five.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Chad Graff for the Athletic today reported that the Patriots prefer to address WR with a veteran player instead of using their 1st rounder at the position. Also, Graff suggested that the Patriots don't view the offensive line as a huge concern and are confident that play will improve.
Could definitely be true. I don't have a feel for how well sourced Graff is yet. I can say he's a moron in terms of analysis, he doesn't know how the cap works at all, and it's pretty clear that since coming over from the Vikings beat he hasn't really done much research on Bill's player preferences, his mocks and free agent stuff have been awful.
 

Zincman

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
433
New London
One thing @SMU-Sox and I have discussed is the lack of "elite" talent on the current roster. You can make arguments for various players but it is hard to make the case that there is an abundance of elite talent on this squad. The team needs an infusion of elite talent rather than trying to fill a large number of holes with lesser players. Hence, #14 may be a chance to acquire an elite player but there are no tackles not receivers who fit this bill. This is why I was advocating for Richardson, who I think is potentially elite and thus worth the gamble. But that ship has apparently sailed as AR is unlikely to see #7 much less #14. If BB judges no player available at #14 to be a superior talent, then I would trade back and use day two to fill some of or needs with the best available playefs
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
One thing @SMU-Sox and I have discussed is the lack of "elite" talent on the current roster. You can make arguments for various players but it is hard to make the case that there is an abundance of elite talent on this squad. The team needs an infusion of elite talent rather than trying to fill a large number of holes with lesser players. Hence, #14 may be a chance to acquire an elite player but there are no tackles not receivers who fit this bill. This is why I was advocating for Richardson, who I think is potentially elite and thus worth the gamble. But that ship has apparently sailed as AR is unlikely to see #7 much less #14. If BB judges no player available at #14 to be a superior talent, then I would trade back and use day two to fill some of or needs with the best available playefs
Seems like the best bet at getting a potentially elite guy falling to #14 are at corner (maybe Christian Gonzalez and Devon Witherspoon?). And then there's the Jalen Carter sized elephant in the room...
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,371
I always thought Tom Brady and the deepest 52 was the Patriot Way during the dynasty. And defensively BB gets credit for taking away the other team's elite talent (take away what they do best). Yeah we don't have the GOAT anymore but we still don't want Barry Sanders and scrub nation. I'm going to blame that fact that we only have 1 of the top 100 (possibly 150) players in the NFL on unfortunate free agency and draft choices rather than intentional getting good not great players.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I don't get him. He had 712 yards total in 3 years at college with limited punt and kick return experience. He wasn't particularly good at either. He is slow. He isn't a dynamic route runner. He has a short catch radius. He doesn't have RAC ability. He was just a below average slot... in college. I guess he would be an ok PS slot option.
Based on this, and BB's history at drafting WR's, I'm penciling him for a 2nd round pick by the Pats, right in front of 3 guys that go for 1,300+ yards in their second seasons.

Honestly, unless someone drops that nobody expects, I'm laying odds that BB trades down from 14 at about 90% right now.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,474
Melrose, MA
One thing @SMU-Sox and I have discussed is the lack of "elite" talent on the current roster. You can make arguments for various players but it is hard to make the case that there is an abundance of elite talent on this squad. The team needs an infusion of elite talent rather than trying to fill a large number of holes with lesser players. Hence, #14 may be a chance to acquire an elite player but there are no tackles not receivers who fit this bill. This is why I was advocating for Richardson, who I think is potentially elite and thus worth the gamble. But that ship has apparently sailed as AR is unlikely to see #7 much less #14. If BB judges no player available at #14 to be a superior talent, then I would trade back and use day two to fill some of or needs with the best available playefs
On defense, the only player who is performaing at that level is Judon. The guy most likely to step up to that level is Barmore - if we are talking about just having the ability even if it hasn't fully shown on the field then I'd call Barmore elite. After that, not much else. Maybe Uche, maybe Marcus Jones (at least he has elite speed), but maybe both of them are too small. I don't think anyone else even merits consideration.

On offense, Stevenson? Maybe Cole Strange has the potential to be elite?

The pickings are slim.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,391
On defense, the only player who is performaing at that level is Judon. The guy most likely to step up to that level is Barmore - if we are talking about just having the ability even if it hasn't fully shown on the field then I'd call Barmore elite. After that, not much else. Maybe Uche, maybe Marcus Jones (at least he has elite speed), but maybe both of them are too small. I don't think anyone else even merits consideration.

On offense, Stevenson? Maybe Cole Strange has the potential to be elite?

The pickings are slim.
Both Dugger and Jack Jones could be elite as well, even if the likelihood of that is remote. On all the Pats championship teams they had those guys that made great, so-called elite plays at critical times. Hightowers sack of Ryan always stood out to me as one of those. Which is to say I agree with the general premise. This does seem like a good CB class to try to get one of those guys.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Through the years, the Pats have typically had an abundance of solid/very good players, but few "elite" (I'm going to consider All-Pro as a elite).

According to Pro-Football-Reference during the Belichick era, this is the full list of first team All-Pros:
  • Brady 3x
  • Gronk 4x
  • Seymour 3x
  • Slater 2x
  • Welker 2x
  • Ghost 2x
  • Law 1x (once more pre-BB)
  • Mankins 1x
  • Gilmore 2x
  • Wilfork 1x
  • Vinatieri 2x
  • Light 1x
  • Mayo 1x
  • Bailey 1x
  • Moss 1x
  • Revis 1x
  • Samuel 1x
  • Vrabel 1x
  • Rodney 1x
  • Marcus Jones 1x
  • Gunner 1x
So that's only 22 players and 6 of them were special teamers.

And most of those years were scattered about. Other than 2007 (5) and 2010 (3), I didn't see any year when the Pats had more than 2 guys as AP-1.

Adding in Pro-Bowl selections, where one can argue "elite" is a rough approximation, you add a bunch more guys, but if you only count guys who had multiple Pro Bowls, you only end up adding 5 more guys, with one being a pure ST (Izzo).
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
Both Dugger and Jack Jones could be elite as well, even if the likelihood of that is remote. On all the Pats championship teams they had those guys that made great, so-called elite plays at critical times. Hightowers sack of Ryan always stood out to me as one of those. Which is to say I agree with the general premise. This does seem like a good CB class to try to get one of those guys.
I don’t think I’d call him elite, but Bentley was very quietly excellent last year. His PFF grade (whatever that means) had him as a top 5 run defender at the position at the position.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,474
Melrose, MA
Both Dugger and Jack Jones could be elite as well, even if the likelihood of that is remote. On all the Pats championship teams they had those guys that made great, so-called elite plays at critical times. Hightowers sack of Ryan always stood out to me as one of those. Which is to say I agree with the general premise. This does seem like a good CB class to try to get one of those guys.
I don’t think I’d call him elite, but Bentley was very quietly excellent last year. His PFF grade (whatever that means) had him as a top 5 run defender at the position at the position.
None of these guys reach "elite" status for me because their weaknesses are too glaring. A linebacker with great run defense ability is of limited value in today's NFL if he cannot also play good pass defense. Dugger does some things extemely well, but he has big weaknesses like playing in space. I don't think either of them will ever truly be alite, though, I suppose there is more of a chance for Dugger, if an every down role for him that doesn't ask him to do things he is bad at can be developed.

Jack Jones we have not seen enough of yet. As it stands, he has good potential as a cover guy but is prone to agrressive mistakes and is a below average tackler, so he has a long way to go.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,474
Melrose, MA
Through the years, the Pats have typically had an abundance of solid/very good players, but few "elite" (I'm going to consider All-Pro as a elite).

According to Pro-Football-Reference during the Belichick era, this is the full list of first team All-Pros:
  • Brady 3x
  • Gronk 4x
  • Seymour 3x
  • Slater 2x
  • Welker 2x
  • Ghost 2x
  • Law 1x (once more pre-BB)
  • Mankins 1x
  • Gilmore 2x
  • Wilfork 1x
  • Vinatieri 2x
  • Light 1x
  • Mayo 1x
  • Bailey 1x
  • Moss 1x
  • Revis 1x
  • Samuel 1x
  • Vrabel 1x
  • Rodney 1x
  • Marcus Jones 1x
  • Gunner 1x
So that's only 22 players and 6 of them were special teamers.

And most of those years were scattered about. Other than 2007 (5) and 2010 (3), I didn't see any year when the Pats had more than 2 guys as AP-1.

Adding in Pro-Bowl selections, where one can argue "elite" is a rough approximation, you add a bunch more guys, but if you only count guys who had multiple Pro Bowls, you only end up adding 5 more guys, with one being a pure ST (Izzo).
This is an excellent point, but with the major caveat that is Brady, the elite of elites at the single most important position on the field. Maybe when one of your elite guys is Brady, you don;t need as many others. (Also, Brady was 3x first team All-Pro but closer to 18x elite as a Patriot, excluding only 2000 and 2008).
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,837
Based on this, and BB's history at drafting WR's, I'm penciling him for a 2nd round pick by the Pats, right in front of 3 guys that go for 1,300+ yards in their second seasons.
He was an UDFA last year. But your overall point stands.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
This is an excellent point, but with the major caveat that is Brady, the elite of elites at the single most important position on the field. Maybe when one of your elite guys is Brady, you don;t need as many others. (Also, Brady was 3x first team All-Pro but closer to 18x elite as a Patriot, excluding only 2000 and 2008).
Very true. I don't think it is hard to argue that Brady was likely a top-5 QB in the vast majority of those years, and considering the weight of the QB position, that is worth being #1 at any other position.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
The elite thing is kind of silly. Not many teams have more than 1 or 2 elite guys, that's the definition of elite.
I think the only place talking about elite talent really matters is QB. Teams with elite QB talent are perennial SB contenders.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
The elite thing is kind of silly. Not many teams have more than 1 or 2 elite guys, that's the definition of elite.
I think the only place talking about elite talent really matters is QB. Teams with elite QB talent are perennial SB contenders.
The elite thing is particularly silly because when people say elite they really mean players at certain positions who make highlight reel plays and not, for example, guys like Mankins Wilfork or DMC who were outstanding and elite or near elite at their positions but not flashy.
 

Zincman

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
433
New London
The elite thing is particularly silly because when people say elite they really mean players at certain positions who make highlight reel plays and not, for example, guys like Mankins Wilfork or DMC who were outstanding and elite or near elite at their positions but not flashy.
Gosh, I didn't know I meant that. But thanks for the education.
 

gammoseditor

also had a stroke
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,219
Somerville, MA
There’s very likely going to be an elite option available at an offensive position where we are losing a key contributor to free agency. I’m not saying we should or are going to pick Bijan Robinson, but I am saying it’s possible and I don’t hate the idea as much as most would.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
Gosh, I didn't know I meant that. But thanks for the education.
wasn’t reacting to your post and looking at your post I have no idea what you mean elite. But I’ll stand by my point that generally folks talking about needing to add elite players or playmakers are essentially referring to offensive skill players and possibly edge pass rushers
 

IdiotKicker

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
10,781
Somerville, MA
I think the way I look at it is “Who do you have to game plan around?” Judon is basically the only guy from last years team that fits the bill. You look at the 2014-15 team as an example and you had Brady, Edelman, Gronk on offense and Hightower and Revis on defense. Guys who make you change your whole scheme because of what they do. You don’t need a ton of these guys, because a ton don’t exist, but having a couple on each side of the ball then elevates the James Whites and Brandon Browners of the world because extra resources are focused elsewhere to their benefit.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
What are we looking at now ... five quarterbacks in the Top 10?
Probably 4 with Young, Stroud, Levis, and AR. Maybe 5 with McKee. He is kind of the Mac Jones of this year. I think he slides though and is a back end of round 1 or day 2 guy. Full disclosure I didn’t look at him yet.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,014
Oregon
Probably 4 with Young, Stroud, Levis, and AR. Maybe 5 with McKee. He is kind of the Mac Jones of this year. I think he slides though and is a back end of round 1 or day 2 guy. Full disclosure I didn’t look at him yet.
My mistake, for some reason I thought there were four, not including Richardson, being bandied about.

If only Josh would take Mac/14 for 7
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,749
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Alas, unlikely Chicago would be interested in waiting to see who was still around at 14, no matter how much you tacked onto the pick.

Edit: But I'll bet they're thinking things in Vegas right now.
Not even talking about the Pats specifically, but the physical tools are absolutely ridiculous. The accuracy issues are 100% real and he's a massive project, but there's some good level of processing and pocket presence in his film that would lead me to take a chance in the top 5. If you believe the scatter shot ball placement is fixable this kid is an insane talent. Throwing the ball 60 yards without any effort as well.