Cellar-Door said:Sure, but the Patriots obviously don't think those two are good QBs. They didn't draft JG just because he's a body to fill the backup QB position. This idiotic insistence by some on this board with saying... oh well they could get some other guy later is infuriating, as it seems to assume that all the QBs are equal without any support They can get an OL later too under that reasoning.
JohnnyTheBone said:I think they have the Mallett deal in place for the first pick in the 4th round, thus making this trade-down more palatable.
DrewDawg said:
Let's let BB speak to that. We don't know his plan, I think we're trying to figure out what it is.
It could be as simple as was said on Twitter--they have to find Brady's replacement eventually. Perhaps they think, for whatever reason, that this guy is someone that could be that guy. As an FCS guy he needs time and since Brady isn't done quite yet, he gets that. If Brady is healthy and playing well for 4 years, then like with Mallett we get a backup QB at low cost.
You think Easley was drafted as a long-term project?Deathofthebambino said:Wow, so frustrating. I don't know how anyone can rate these first two rounds as anything but a D or worse. They basically did nothing, got nothing, and accomplished nothing. One of the deepest drafts in years, and the Pats are basically spectators. Every other team in contention is moving around the draft board, accumulating picks, grabbing impact players, filling holes and putting their team in a better position to win the Super Bowl THIS YEAR. I want to hear someone tell me how the Pats made their chances of winning the Super Bowl this year better than they were on Wednesday.
I'll hang up and listen while I go watch Yu Darvish ruin the rest of the evening.
They got a DL they think will help them this year.Deathofthebambino said:Wow, so frustrating. I don't know how anyone can rate these first two rounds as anything but a D or worse. They basically did nothing, got nothing, and accomplished nothing. One of the deepest drafts in years, and the Pats are basically spectators. Every other team in contention is moving around the draft board, accumulating picks, grabbing impact players, filling holes and putting their team in a better position to win the Super Bowl THIS YEAR. I want to hear someone tell me how the Pats made their chances of winning the Super Bowl this year better than they were on Wednesday.
I'll hang up and listen while I go watch Yu Darvish ruin the rest of the evening.
Precisely. Stand down everyone.DrewDawg said:
Let's let BB speak to that. We don't know his plan, I think we're trying to figure out what it is.
ivanvamp said:I am of the belief that Belichick has been the best drafter in the NFL during his time with the Patriots, but that doesn't mean he doesn't leave me scratching my head from time to time. A middling QB in round 2, when they could have gotten possibly better QBs later, and when they still had needs elsewhere? Then this trade for….what, exactly? So their day 2 ends up being nobody that they hope even sniffs the football field for 4 years or so.
Deathofthebambino said:If someone told you on Wednesday that the Pats would come out of Day 2 with Dominique Easley, Jimmie Garoppolo and an extra 4th rounder and 6th rounder, would you have been excited about it?
That trade they just made makes almost as little sense as picking JG, IMO. Unless they've officially lost out on every guy that they thought was worth taking in this draft. Oh, the irony.
Then make that claim. That isn't the claim people are making, they simply keep saying... oh you can get a Qb later, without any statement as to which QB, and why. A majority of the criticisms of that kind seemed to criticize taking ANY QB in that spot. I have no problem with your argument (I disagree, but that is fine) I have a problem with the generic ripping of the pick in this thread based on the argument that ANY QB was a mistake and that it would be better to get ANY Qb later.mascho said:
I'm not saying all QBs are equal.
I'm saying that after watching a ton of Mettenberger/McCarron, and then watching a ton of film on JG and his entire Senior Bowl week, I'm saying he isn't as good as the other two. And I'm not alone in that opinion. Which I don't think is fucking idiotic.
soxfan121 said:
No, they are looking for a guy who pushes Brady for the starting job. Because that's what they've done since Day One of the Belichick Era - it's why I've dropped a half-dozen Drew Bledsoe references. Because as good as Tom Brady is, someday - maybe sooner than we all hope - he won't be good anymore. It happens to every athlete. I hope Brady plays as long as George Blanda. I really, really do.
But if he does not, then having a very good back up is preferable. If said backup then starts kicking Brady's ass in practice and proves he's better...isn't that the best possible outcome? The Steve Young scenario? Rolling along with the next guy, who you found, groomed and then unleashed when circumstance or Mo Lewis dicate?
Cellar-Door said:Then make that claim. That isn't the claim people are making, they simply keep saying... oh you can get a Qb later, without any statement as to which QB, and why. A majority of the criticisms of that kind seemed to criticize taking ANY QB in that spot. I have no problem with your argument (I disagree, but that is fine) I have a problem with the generic ripping of the pick in this thread based on the argument that ANY QB was a mistake and that it would be better to get ANY Qb later.
Very well played. Nice to see that hit go through given the ridiculous scorer decision (not to mention the humiliation of being no hit)Reverend said:
I'm awesome.
Deathofthebambino said:I think there is a better chance that the Pats have exactly zero players from the 2014 draft on their opening day roster in 2017, than there is of them having 3 guys from this draft on that roster.
That is a different argument altogether, though.Deathofthebambino said:If someone told you on Wednesday that the Pats would come out of Day 2 with Dominique Easley, Jimmie Garoppolo and an extra 4th rounder and 6th rounder, would you have been excited about it?
Edit: I took out the end of that. Don't feel like going down that road.
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:Mini-run on TEs here. My Brandon Coleman dream is still alive! Running out of red zone targets and the pats need one!
Reverend said:
Why didn't you just write, "Yeah, I dunno either,"?
This is dumb.
The odds both of those guys are gone before their cheap rookie deals are up is fairly low. I think every pats first rounder under BB has at least made it to the years four opening rosterDeathofthebambino said:Hendu, what's the percentage of 4th rounders and beyond that last 3 years in the NFL? I'm not "washing out' anything. I'm just playing the odds. If one of Easley or JG doesn't pan out, the Pats need to hit on 2 out of 7 4th plus rounders. That's not easy to do in this league.
Ed, make up my mind about what? I'm perfectly capable of arguing more than one thing. Nothing I said contradicts anything else.
I'm glad we "wasted" a draft pick on a pedestrian QB when we had Bledsoe still in his prime. How'd that work out?phragle said:
I don't think it matters if he's good or not. Good QBs are taken almost every year. It doesn't help now, and he may never start a game. That's the problem. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Brady played through Graoppolo's contract, or if a great positional player was drafted just after him.
Jurrell Casey and Julius Thomas were drafted just after Mallett. How'd that work out?
What happened to hanging up and listening? Head to Club E's and do a wild turkey shot and call it a nite, you're going off the rails here.Deathofthebambino said:Hendu, what's the percentage of 4th rounders and beyond that last 3 years in the NFL? I'm not "washing out' anything. I'm just playing the odds. If one of Easley or JG doesn't pan out, the Pats need to hit on 2 out of 7 4th plus rounders. That's not easy to do in this league.
Ed, make up my mind about what? I'm perfectly capable of arguing more than one thing. Nothing I said contradicts anything else.
DrewDawg said:
Not a Rev Approved answer? I generally like you as the Conscience of the Thread and The One Who Keeps it on Track, but there's no right answer here. Or at least none that we're privy too. If there's a specific answer you want, just tell us.
And two fairly shitty drafts in a row. I guess it depends on what you think of Knee-Hunter Matt Elam.Stitch01 said:Good thing they anchored themselves to a $20 mill a year paperweight
HomeRunBaker said:I'm glad we "wasted" a draft pick on a pedestrian QB when we had Bledsoe still in his prime. How'd that work out?