Pats Draft Poll

What do the Pats do in round 1?

  • Trade up to 4 and draft a QB

    Votes: 14 5.4%
  • Trade up to 7-8 or 10-11 and draft a QB

    Votes: 99 38.4%
  • Trade up and draft a non-QB

    Votes: 6 2.3%
  • Pick best available OT at 15 (Darrisaw, Slater, etc.)

    Votes: 11 4.3%
  • Pick best available CB at 15 (Horn, Surtain, Farley, etc.)

    Votes: 20 7.8%
  • Pick best available front 7 defender at 15 (Parsons, Paye, Barmore, Collins, etc.)

    Votes: 47 18.2%
  • Trade down, pick up a 2nd or 3rd rounder, then select one of OT / CB / WR / front 7 defender

    Votes: 54 20.9%
  • Trade down, pick up a 2nd or 3rd rounder, then select one of OT / CB / WR / front 7 defender

    Votes: 4 1.6%
  • Pick best available WR at 15

    Votes: 3 1.2%

  • Total voters
    258
  • Poll closed .

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
What's SoSH consensus on what actually happens in 9 days?

Edit: apologies for the repeat answer in the poll. I can't edit now that votes have been cast.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,863
Oregon
Picked "Trade down, pick up a 2nd or 3rd rounder, then select one of OT / CB / WR / front 7 defender" ... almost went with "Trade down, pick up a 2nd or 3rd rounder, then select one of OT / CB / WR / front 7 defender," but thought was too obvious.

I just don't see them making the move necessary to get one of the "other 3" quarterbacks. If Jones slides to them, they might do it, or they might parlay that into a trade down with a team in the bottom third of the draft that has Jones on its radar.

If they stay at 15, I think it's for a corner.
 

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,451
Right Here
Picked Trade up to 7 - 8 or 10-11 and draft a QB. We can't really predict if that will happen or not as GM Bill has been known to surprise and not draft based on need.

That said, starting from the idea that they will draft a QB, I don't see them with enough chips (that they're willing to part with) to trade up to #4, should they trade up, it will be for a QB.

If they can't trade up, it will be for the best available player (regardless of position).

I can't envision them trading down considering that value of a #15 pick.
 

fieldslikebuckner

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2005
377
The Boston-NY DMZ
I still believe Jimmy G. will be the QB next year, so no reason to spend a lot of draft ammo to move up.

And while not a choice in the poll, but if one of the top-5 QBs slide to 15, I could see that being the pick. Otherwise, I like the idea of moving down to later in the first while also grabbing more draft assets in the 30-80 range.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
I think they pick BPA at 15, there is no option for that.
Well there are kind of 3 options for it - we have no idea how the Pats rank these guys relative to one another. Assuming grades are similar, do you think they go CB, OT, or front 7?
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
I still believe Jimmy G. will be the QB next year, so no reason to spend a lot of draft ammo to move up.

And while not a choice in the poll, but if one of the top-5 QBs slide to 15, I could see that being the pick. Otherwise, I like the idea of moving down to later in the first while also grabbing more draft assets in the 30-80 range.
I didn't include it because it doesn't seem like a real possibility - it would take luck for it to happen, as opposed to the other scenarios where the Pats control the situation.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,863
Oregon
I still believe Jimmy G. will be the QB next year, so no reason to spend a lot of draft ammo to move up.
For this coming season? Why would SF leave themselves shorthanded at QB should the one it drafts not be ready to start immediately?
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
For this coming season? Why would SF leave themselves shorthanded at QB should the one it drafts not be ready to start immediately?
It's been mentioned elsewhere but they have both Sudeld and Rosen currently on the roster, in addition to Jimmy and pick #3.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,509
Really tempting fate leaving RB and S out of those lists....
I'm gonna blame you when Bill trades down to 27 and takes Javonte Williams

It's been mentioned elsewhere but they have both Sudeld and Rosen currently on the roster, in addition to Jimmy and pick #3.
So no NFL QBs beyond Jimmy
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,863
Oregon
It's been mentioned elsewhere but they have both Sudeld and Rosen currently on the roster, in addition to Jimmy and pick #3.
I think I did the mentioning. For a team looking to get back into playoff contention, that's not much of a safety net
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
I think I did the mentioning. For a team looking to get back into playoff contention, that's not much of a safety net
Yeah, the Niners don't actually need to trade Jimmy, unless they want to free up cap space to carry into next year. They have to decide if that is more valuable than going the Alex Smith / Mahomes route of letting Jimmy start for most / all of the season, potentially maximizing their wins, and letting the rookie develop at his own pace. Not an easy decision IMO, unless you are planning to start the rookie from day 1, in which case I trade JG pre-draft.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,863
Oregon
Getting off the sidetrack ... I can see them move up as high as 10 if the right guy is there, but I just don't see them trading the future 1 it would take to make a huge move.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,620
I guess it depends on who’s available but if Fields and/or Lance lasts until the Lions at 7 (or much less likely the Cowboys at 10) then I think you definitely trade up to take one of them
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
12,663
UWS, NYC
I guessed best CB at 15. Am emotionally preparing myself for likelihood they don’t find enough value to trade up for Fields or Lance, and CB becomes mighty important if Gilmore doesn’t play in ‘21 or JCJ leaves in ‘22.
 

MainerInExile

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2003
4,772
Bay Area
I think a QB falls to 15. I'm not sure which one, but I can't imagine the whole NFL is as hyped about all 5 of these QBs as the media is. I'm not sure if it will be Fields, Lance, or Jones, but I think one of these QBs falls. So I would have said QB at 15 if it was an option.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,265
Mansfield MA
I think a QB falls to 15. I'm not sure which one, but I can't imagine the whole NFL is as hyped about all 5 of these QBs as the media is. I'm not sure if it will be Fields, Lance, or Jones, but I think one of these QBs falls. So I would have said QB at 15 if it was an option.
If whatever is wrong with one of these guys is enough to get him to slip to 15, who's to say the Patriots wouldn't also be scared off by it?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
44,353
If whatever is wrong with one of these guys is enough to get him to slip to 15, who's to say the Patriots wouldn't also be scared off by it?
Because 15 may be where that player belongs even with something "wrong".
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
4,596
If they can move up and get Fields, do it. Otherwise, get a Front 7 player either at 15 or move down depending upon who is taken by then.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
5,786
New York City
What I want them to do is trade up to get a QB (well, assuming one of the top 4 is still on the board by pick 7-8). What I think they will do, though, is trade down lower in the first round for an extra 2nd or 3rd rounder in next year's draft, when they may be in a position to need new talent more than they are now having just signed a boatload of free agents.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
What I want them to do is trade up to get a QB (well, assuming one of the top 4 is still on the board by pick 7-8). What I think they will do, though, is trade down lower in the first round for an extra 2nd or 3rd rounder in next year's draft, when they may be in a position to need new talent more than they are now having just signed a boatload of free agents.
To be clear my intent with the poll is what we think they WILL do, not what we WANT them to do. I think that would be like 90% votes for trading up and drafting a QB so I didn't bother.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
5,786
New York City
To be clear my intent with the poll is what we think they WILL do, not what we WANT them to do. I think that would be like 90% votes for trading up and drafting a QB so I didn't bother.
Yeah, that's why I voted for the "trade down" option. Just adding my two cents about ideal outcomes. (Although it really does depend on QB - I'd be pretty pumped for a trade up to get Fields, pumped but also pretty nervous about a trade up to get Lance, and absolutely perplexed if they trade up to get Jones or anyone else.)

Edit: Although come to think of it, the most trolly move Belichick could make would be to trade up to 7 or 8 with Fields still on the board, get everyone super excited, and then pick Penei Sewell or some other non-QB.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,863
Oregon
Trade up to 7 or 8 or 10-11 and draft a QB. Give me Fields or Lance.
How many first-rounders are you willing to give up, though? The next two after this year?

To be clear my intent with the poll is what we think they WILL do, not what we WANT them to do. I think that would be like 90% votes for trading up and drafting a QB so I didn't bother.
Yeah, I can't believe there's that many who think BB will back up the truck to move to 4
 
Feb 19, 2015
3,717
I went with best available CB at 15, but only because that's my preference for what they do, assuming one of Surtain or Horn is available.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,022
Dallas
How many first-rounders are you willing to give up, though? The next two after this year?



Yeah, I can't believe there's that many who think BB will back up the truck to move to 4
Me personally? 1. I think the price for 7, 8, or 9, 10, 11 is not going to be as high as what SF gave up for 3. Most QB moves are like first round pick + a day 2 pick + future 1 or future 2. I would expect the Pats to give up 15 and either 46/96 and a future 1 or a future 2 to move up 5-7 spots.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
Me personally? 1. I think the price for 7, 8, or 9, 10, 11 is not going to be as high as what SF gave up for 3. Most QB moves are like first round pick + a day 2 pick + future 1 or future 2. I would expect the Pats to give up 15 and either 46/96 and a future 1 or a future 2 to move up 5-7 spots.
Which would you rather give up in a hypothetical deal, 96 + future first or 46 + future second? I think I’d rather give up 96 and the future first so they can get another quality guy in the second round, and they could even move back up in the late 3rd using all of their 4th-6th rounders.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
528
Which would you rather give up in a hypothetical deal, 96 + future first or 46 + future second? I think I’d rather give up 96 and the future first so they can get another quality guy in the second round, and they could even move back up in the late 3rd using all of their 4th-6th rounders.
Would do 46 + future 2nd in a heartbeat.

To contectualize my gut feeling on this...

Per the Stuart chart, 46 is worth 10.2 points & 96 is worth 5.5 points.

We can find the breakeven draft pick point where the difference between a 1st & 2nd is 4.7 points.

At 29th pick, the 1st rounder is worth 4.8 more than the 2nd (61), & 30 is worth 4.6 more than 62, so that's the tipping point. If we get the 30th through 32nd pick I still think we'd be ok by not getting max value, & if the team struggles for whatever reason, we're much better not losing that valuable 1st if we could avoid it.

Those charts see time as a flat circle so they don't discount for future picks, but they also value higher picks less than most NFL teams do, & don't factor in the value of a 5th year option.

Plus, other than our 2 2020 2nds who I have hopes for still, Jimmy G was our last competent 2nd round pick.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
That’s all fair. A gap from 7-11 to 96 kind of scares me, seems like a lot of talent in the 35-55 range. I just can’t see them trading up too far at this point. I think the highest they go is 10 honestly.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
528
If they think they're 1 piece away, & that piece is the right QB, then that gap is not that important.

Using a sports betting example - an elite QB is worth 6 or 7 points against the spread. Basically no non-QB in the league is worth more than 1 point against the spread.

If they think someone has a chance to be a 6 to 7 point player, there is almost no price too high, & certainly not the chance to maybe draft a 0.5 to 1 point player.

Obviously there's a lot more to team building than that in terms of cost-controlled talent, organizational depth, etc., but having a potential franchise QB on a rookie contract outweighs basically all those factors.

We'll see if they value anyone that highly, but if they do, not getting the deal done over a 2nd rounder would be malpractice.
 

3_games_down

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2007
122
Coastal NC
I think a QB falls to 15. I'm not sure which one, but I can't imagine the whole NFL is as hyped about all 5 of these QBs as the media is. I'm not sure if it will be Fields, Lance, or Jones, but I think one of these QBs falls. So I would have said QB at 15 if it was an option.
Voted to trade up to 10 and draft a QB, but would have choose to wait to draft a QB at 15 if Pitts, Sewell, Chase, Smith, Waddle come off the board quickly. If no QB is available at 15 take Horn or Parsons.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,431
Hingham, MA
Good point @JM3 about not letting a second rounder be a hang up.

Separate question: do we even think Parsons is on the Pats board? Did they attend PSU pro day? (I know there are a bunch of good PSU prospects this year).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,509
Good point @JM3 about not letting a second rounder be a hang up.

Separate question: do we even think Parsons is on the Pats board? Did they attend PSU pro day? (I know there are a bunch of good PSU prospects this year).
I kind of hope not... I get that he's immensely talented, but I really don't want anything to do with him, same way I felt about Hill and others like him.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,306
I still believe Jimmy G. will be the QB next year, so no reason to spend a lot of draft ammo to move up.
So spend draft capital for their part time QB of the future? If they're wasting draft capital anyway, why not trade down, pick up extra picks, and burn one on Mond or Newman?
 

Jeff Van GULLY

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
3,644
What makes you think BB and/or Josh is/are that high on him?
Well I’m assuming Mac Jones goes 3 and Bill takes the position that they won’t be this high up again for awhile and even if it’s a bit of an overdraft, the talent and production are too much to pass up. He commented something similar a few days ago in a pc that was referenced in this thread.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,022
Dallas
Which would you rather give up in a hypothetical deal, 96 + future first or 46 + future second? I think I’d rather give up 96 and the future first so they can get another quality guy in the second round, and they could even move back up in the late 3rd using all of their 4th-6th rounders.
Either way works. If they pick another player aside from QB in the top 100 it should be OT or CB imo.

I would rather give up 46 and a future 2nd. I think next years draft is going to be better than this one. I am not enthralled with anyone in the 35-65 range. I would package 96 and a 4th to trade up for an OT that slides a bit. I think they need to come out of the top 100 with a top 5 QB or an OT and a CB. And if they can swing 2/3 even better. This year is a small draft class with a ton of question marks while next year is going to be loaded (the guys who returned this year will likely leave after next year). So in the end I would rather have the better pick next year.
 
Last edited:

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
1,192
Melbourne, Australia
Edit: great discussion.

Seems like they’re one piece away. Just such a crap shoot to find the right one... Agree with JM3 - if they have figured out who it is, please let price not hold them back.
 
Last edited:

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
44,353
Well I’m assuming Mac Jones goes 3 and Bill takes the position that they won’t be this high up again for awhile and even if it’s a bit of an overdraft, the talent and production are too much to pass up. He commented something similar a few days ago in a pc that was referenced in this thread.
Exactly. Additionally, calling someone an "overdraft" can be a misnomer. If your team is full of holes everywhere, trading up for what might be a high floor, low ceiling guy like Jones can definitely be an overdraft. If you're a team that doesn't *seem* to have a lot of holes and has every expectation of not drafting in top 10-15 in the near future then making a play for that guy might be perfectly acceptable if you like him.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
528
The thing is...Jones is also a low floor guy.

His primary skill is thought to be "accuracy" but does he actually have the arm talent to get the ball where it needs to go?

Colt McCoy doesn't seem like a crazy comp to me...

Screenshot_20210421-061935_Chrome.jpg

I argued this vehemently elsewhere at the time, but I strongly believed that Josh Allen actually had the highest FLOOR of any QB in that class because he could never be worse than a low-end starter with his combination of physical skills.

Accurate college QBs are all well & good, but the QBs that really hit are the ones with the combination of arm talent, awareness, athleticism & the desire to work their azzes off.

Mac will at the most have 2 of those things.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
44,353
The thing is...Jones is also a low floor guy.
Okay...but if a QB is truly seen by the decision makers as a low floor, low ceiling guy, then he's not going in the first round is he?

Are teams just fooling themselves? What are they not seeing? QBs from big schools that put up big numbers aren't always drafted. There's *something* there isn't there?