Official Patriots 2024 Draft Pick Watch Thread (#3)

Zincman

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
444
New London
I think so, but mostly because the acquiring team is gonna have to pay him without really having as much time as the Bears have, and if they are moving on...

That said, I think the Bears should hold him, draft MHJ and Alt and roll.
You are probably right but it may be that the Bears don't want to give him a 2nd contract either. I certainly wouldn't.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
16,145
I would only consider MJH (or any non-QB) if there was near-certainty a competent veteran was coming in to start. Otherwise, take one of the top three QB prospects and cross our fingers.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,891
Hingham, MA
To me it's a question of what is more likely to happen (and this assumes that you hit on pick):

1--A really good QB is able to produce with average WR talent around him and lead the team to wins.
2--A really good WR is able to produce with average QB talent around him and lead the team to wins.

I lean towards a really good QB doing more, because like Jed said, you get more bites at the WR (and offense in general) apple.
Plus you would eventually have to pay the WR. So many star WRs have been paid elsewhere. Whereas if you find your Allen or Mahomes, he's going to be with you for 10+ years.
 

gammoseditor

also had a stroke
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,350
Somerville, MA
To me it's a question of what is more likely to happen (and this assumes that you hit on pick):

1--A really good QB is able to produce with average WR talent around him and lead the team to wins.
2--A really good WR is able to produce with average QB talent around him and lead the team to wins.

I lean towards a really good QB doing more, because like Jed said, you get more bites at the WR (and offense in general) apple.
As someone who prefers MHJ right now I will say I agree with this. The only concern is getting a really good QB. Recent history for the 3rd QB taken isn’t too bad but there are misses. The extended history is worse. I’m looking forward to less mocks and more scouting reports.
 

JokersWildJIMED

Blinded by Borges
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2004
2,783
It seems relatively simple in that each year there are relatively few (if any) possible great quarterback available in the draft...so if you need one and have a chance to grab one you do it. It is true that by the time you get to #3 your QB may be gone, but the Pats should move up in the case (if possible). With receivers, every year there are multiple good to great receivers available and it is not worth passing on a QB for a position that comes available every year.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,584

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
I'm not sold on McCarthy. To me, he profiles as a guy playing with lots of talent around him except he did not put up huge numbers.
McCarthy is the Jordan Love style development play of this draft. He's almost 4 years younger than the other QBs in that tier (Nix, Penix) with a lot less experience.
I'm not sold on him either, in part because the offense never asked him to do much, but their are some intriguing traits there in his mobility, and arm. I'd prefer him over the other guys in that tier, but also wouldn't feel good about trading up to 19 to draft him (if you trade up there it should be for a tackle to me).
 

jtn46

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 10, 2004
9,853
Norwalk, CT
The volume of massively talented wide receivers playing critical roles for playoff teams drafted in the 2nd or later—and many in their 1st or 2nd season—has been eye-popping. Collins and Dell (pre-injury) for Houston, Green Bay's entire pass-catching group, Puka, Amon-Ra, Trey Palmer. That has me leaning QB as much as anything, and I am someone who has been skittish about that direction in the past.
The Pats could have drafted Puka Nacua, Tank Dell, Trey Palmer, Nico Collins, Jayden Reed, Dontayvion Wicks, Romeo Doubs, etc... because none of these guys were picked early in their drafts. They didn't, likely, because the Pats did not evaluate them as good values where they were picked, which suggests something we know, the Pats have been exceptionally bad at evaluating receivers, besides with Pop Douglas, and not just in the draft but in the pros as well. Maybe Belichick was the reason, but it sure seems like they are leaving a lot of the people who were involved in evaluating these receivers and others in place.

I'm not necessarily advocating drafting Harrison but if we agree the team needs a big-time receiver, the argument that the Pats can pass on Harrison because they will find the next Puka Nacua or Tank Dell is not persuasive to me.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
The Pats could have drafted Puka Nacua, Tank Dell, Trey Palmer, Nico Collins, Jayden Reed, Dontayvion Wicks, Romeo Doubs, etc... because none of these guys were picked early in their drafts. They didn't, likely, because the Pats did not evaluate them as good values where they were picked, which suggests something we know, the Pats have been exceptionally bad at evaluating receivers, besides with Pop Douglas, and not just in the draft but in the pros as well. Maybe Belichick was the reason, but it sure seems like they are leaving a lot of the people who were involved in evaluating these receivers and others in place.

I'm not necessarily advocating drafting Harrison but if we agree the team needs a big-time receiver, the argument that the Pats can pass on Harrison because they will find the next Puka Nacua or Tank Dell is not persuasive to me.
I thought it was interesting that Breer has repeatedly noted that Harry was a flashpoint in the organization with some scouts leaving and a lot of personnel people who stayed being pissed off that their evaluations were ignored by Bill who wanted Harry while the scouts preferred Brown or Samuel. Now that could just be post-hoc asscovering, but it's interesting.

Edit- also probably worth noting that guys who are drafted late and have success is also heavily about how they are used and developed and QB situation, which is probably why the Patriots used to be the team that unearthed these late round and undrafted guys when they had an elite offense and QB, and now they don't seem to as much because the QB and offensive situation is garbage.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,584
I'm not necessarily advocating drafting Harrison but if we agree the team needs a big-time receiver, the argument that the Pats can pass on Harrison because they will find the next Puka Nacua or Tank Dell is not persuasive to me.
Does it help that apparently the Pats scouts wanted AJ Brown and were overruled?

If you miss on a WR your offense can survive with other WRs, RBs, TEs, etc. You miss on a QB and the whole thing goes out the window.

I won't be RAGING if we take MHJ, but I'm still leaning QB.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I would only consider MJH (or any non-QB) if there was near-certainty a competent veteran was coming in to start. Otherwise, take one of the top three QB prospects and cross our fingers.
I just keep looking back at the 2021 draft where the 4 worst picks in the top 15 were all QB's. The positional-premium value for QB has gone so far out of whack.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,400
Does it help that apparently the Pats scouts wanted AJ Brown and were overruled?

If you miss on a WR your offense can survive with other WRs, RBs, TEs, etc. You miss on a QB and the whole thing goes out the window.

I won't be RAGING if we take MHJ, but I'm still leaning QB.
The biggest problem, IMO, was not only missing on a wide receiver and leaving uber talented ones there, but they missed on wide receiver, when it was clear Tom Brady wasn't happy with the weapons he had prior to that draft, and it got worse from there. I remain convinced if the Pats nailed that pick, Tom Brady is still in New England.

Jalen Hurts could probably tell folks today how much he needed AJ Brown. Without him, he looked a lot like the guy that went 9-10 in his first 19 NFL starts.

And I've posted this before, but if this video makes the whole N'Keal Harry pick hurt even more:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkmKcahjJfE
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
I just keep looking back at the 2021 draft where the 4 worst picks in the top 15 were all QB's. The positional-premium value for QB has gone so far out of whack.
Sure (well actually not sure, AVT and Horn brought a lot less value than several of the QBs)... but of course none of the other top 15 picks matter at all if the team that took them doesn't have a QB. The premium isn't out of whack at all, QBs are FAR FAR FAR more important than any other position in the league. You get a top QB, your team is in great shape, if you don't you're probably screwed even if you hit on your pick at some other position. We have a decent amount of history to look at and it basically all says the same thing... if you don't have a QB and you have a top pick.... you either hit on QB or you're going to have a top pick again soon, it's probably the only position where a single hit pick changes the future of your franchise.

If you don't have a QB and you take say a WR top 5..... you're probably going the Lions route as your best possible outcome (he becomes arguably the best WR in the league and you still suck until you get a top 3 pick and take a QB).
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
52,316
The Pats could have drafted Puka Nacua, Tank Dell, Trey Palmer, Nico Collins, Jayden Reed, Dontayvion Wicks, Romeo Doubs, etc... because none of these guys were picked early in their drafts. They didn't, likely, because the Pats did not evaluate them as good values where they were picked, which suggests something we know, the Pats have been exceptionally bad at evaluating receivers, besides with Pop Douglas, and not just in the draft but in the pros as well. Maybe Belichick was the reason, but it sure seems like they are leaving a lot of the people who were involved in evaluating these receivers and others in place.

I'm not necessarily advocating drafting Harrison but if we agree the team needs a big-time receiver, the argument that the Pats can pass on Harrison because they will find the next Puka Nacua or Tank Dell is not persuasive to me.
I think there is a mix of not valuing correctly and undervaluing the position in general. The couple of recent high picks have been really bad. But they generally haven't taken many bites. The teams that consistently find guys who can play WR are constantly taking receivers. Pittsburgh has a bunch of misses in their history but you don't notice because they shake that tree so many times they will inevitably get some good ones.

I think we would run into more good WR by accident simply by trying more. They screwed up the Harry pick and didn't try again for 3 drafts. KC screwed up the Skyy Moore pick and went right back to the well a year later taking their new #1 in the 2nd round.

Did the Pats suddenly start knowing how to evaluate receivers when they took a good one in the 6th round last year? Maybe, or maybe they just took two shots and one of them worked.
 
Last edited:

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,400
I think there is a mix of not valuing correctly and undervaluing the position in general. The couple of recent high picks have been really bad. But they generally haven't taken many bites. The teams that consistently find guys who can play WR are constantly taking receivers. Pittsburgh has a bunch of misses in their history but you don't notice because they shake that tree so many times they will inevitably get some good ones.

I think we would run into more good WR by accident simply by trying more. They screwed up the Harry pick and didn't try again for 3 drafts. KC screwed up the Skyy Moore pick and went right back to the well a year later taking their new #1 in the 2nd round.

Did the Pats suddenly start knowing how to evaluate receivers when they took a good one in the 6th round last year? Maybe, or maybe they just took two shots and one of them worked.
Been screaming about this for 5-10 years now. They got away with this for a long time because of Tom Brady. They never changed their view of receivers after Brady (or planned for after Brady) and then they missed on everything they tried.

In the last 4 drafts, the Pats have taken a total of 4 wide receivers (Thornton in the 2nd, Douglas/Boutte in the 6th and Tre Nixon in the 7th). They took 2 TE's back to back in the 3rd round in 2020, and haven't taken one since. Yes, they went out and tried to get a bunch of help in FA, etc. with BourneAgholor/Parker/JuJu, etc., but for the most part, they were all misses. Instead of taking shots in the draft, the Pats overspent on middling guys...

Green Bay, knowing they were getting ready to move to a young QB, have taken 6 Wide Receivers and 2 tight ends in the last TWO drafts. They went 2nd round tight end in Musgrave, 3rd round tight end in Kraft, 2nd round WR in Reed, 2nd Round WR in Watson, 4th round WR in Dobbs, 5th round receiver in Wicks. In just two drafts.

Instead of taking more shots at receiver, we took Bailey in the 5th (he's gone), Rorhwasser in the 6th (never played), Ryland in the 4th (looks like a bust) and Baringer in the 6th (looks like a good punter). They took Rhamondre in the 4th (fine pick) and then went back and picked 2 more RB's the following year in the 4th and 6th. They did take like 6 defensive backs, 6 linebackers, a couple defensive ends during that time. This is not how you build a team with an already solid defense, a genius defensive coach, and no offense.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,584
They never changed their view of receivers after Brady (or planned for after Brady) and then they missed on everything they tried.
Right before the draft combine last year, Lazar interviewed Groh and Groh said that with the way the game is trending you need to invest resources in WR, whether that's money or high draft picks. The scouts also had Brown and Deebo higher than N'Keal.

I will be interested to see if they actually invest the money/picks now, with a different shot caller.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
52,316
Been screaming about this for 5-10 years now. They got away with this for a long time because of Tom Brady. They never changed their view of receivers after Brady (or planned for after Brady) and then they missed on everything they tried.

In the last 4 drafts, the Pats have taken a total of 4 wide receivers (Thornton in the 2nd, Douglas/Boutte in the 6th and Tre Nixon in the 7th). They took 2 TE's back to back in the 3rd round in 2020, and haven't taken one since. Yes, they went out and tried to get a bunch of help in FA, etc. with BourneAgholor/Parker/JuJu, etc., but for the most part, they were all misses. Instead of taking shots in the draft, the Pats overspent on middling guys...

Green Bay, knowing they were getting ready to move to a young QB, have taken 6 Wide Receivers and 2 tight ends in the last TWO drafts. They went 2nd round tight end in Musgrave, 3rd round tight end in Kraft, 2nd round WR in Reed, 2nd Round WR in Watson, 4th round WR in Dobbs, 5th round receiver in Wicks. In just two drafts.

Instead of taking more shots at receiver, we took Bailey in the 5th (he's gone), Rorhwasser in the 6th (never played), Ryland in the 4th (looks like a bust) and Baringer in the 6th (looks like a good punter). They took Rhamondre in the 4th (fine pick) and then went back and picked 2 more RB's the following year in the 4th and 6th. They did take like 6 defensive backs, 6 linebackers, a couple defensive ends during that time. This is not how you build a team with an already solid defense, a genius defensive coach, and no offense.
The DB thing is particularly frustrating in this context because it’s basically the defensive side of the same coin. You need volume at the position, there’s a lot of value in finding a true #1, and the position generally holds a ton of importance for the way the game is changing. They’ve correctly identified that. But that thought process didn’t cross over.
 

Zincman

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
444
New London
I flip-flop on this all of the time. QB is so important and if you're at #3 and need a QB, you should really grab one at #3.

However, MHJ is the surest bet at the top of the draft. Grabbing Nix at #35 to go with him would not be the worst plan.
Given the QB needy teams, I suspect Nix has less than a 50/50 chance to be there at #35.
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,616
If Bill were to sign with ATL to be their head coach and Jayden Daniels fell to the Falcons at #8, that would be quite something.

I love MHJ, safest bet in the crapshoot, but I think if you're that high up - top 3 - you have to get a QB unless there aren't any prospects at that position. There are. Get Caleb, Maye or Daniels, be grateful you did...and don't look back. Then nab a WR in the second round.
 

Zincman

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
444
New London
There is a strong case to be made (I wouldn't do it because I am with @Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt ) but there is a strong case for trading back, hope to grab a franchise LT and fill in the many holes of this team with multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,858
Going with something other than one of the top three QBs just means to me that they are digging in for a longer rebuild. I don't think the FA QBs or Fields will end up here, and we'll very likely be back in the market for a QB in 2025, talking ourselves into Ewers, Sanders, Milroe or whatever and seeing what's available in FA. It might not work out that way, of course, but that's going to be my first impression.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,597
I'm not sold on McCarthy. To me, he profiles as a guy playing with lots of talent around him except he did not put up huge numbers.
I watched the team a ton (wolverine fan/alum so I’m also biased)…he’s had great lines and running games and an elite pass catching tight end in Loveland…but his receivers are nfl jags at best. Also, the offense is very much a pro offense - if he played at, say, Oklahoma or usc, he’d put up massive numbers. He can run and throw accurately on the run and he’s highly dedicated kid. I think he’d work his ass off, and his talent is real. He’s 20 and a far better player than penix or nix was at the same age.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
Interesting Twitter thread on drafting a QB in the first round. Hit rates are very high 1st overall.

The below part of the thread looks at just 2-10 and 2-5.

View: https://twitter.com/davekluge/status/1747397139834007958?s=46&t=2Ncci6pVLxm2q2YAXCD8zw


full thread unrolled

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1747397129138479457.html
Interesting, though worth noting that he's advocating for drafting 1.1 over trading back, the success rate is lower in the rest of the 1st, but also.... way better than any alternative.
One thing that surprised me a bit... I would have expected the gap on Pro-Bowl and playoff win to be bigger... now maybe totals in each of those matter more. But the 4,000 yards and 30+ TDs...not really great success measures and probably not amazingly usefull for a 30 year sample, 1994 was not 2024 in terms of yards/TDs. (like for example... Steve McNair was a really good QB, won an MVP.... never sniffed either, McNabb got the TDs one season, but never the yards. Also, #1 overall instead of first QB is probably a mistake. Basically the two things together are going to push his sample because:
1. Way more players throw for 4,000 yards or 30TDs in the second half of his sample...
2. Teams recognized QB value particularly as rules favored passing, so the top QB went #1 overall far more in the later part of the sample.
 

PRabbit

New Member
Apr 3, 2022
122
If Chicago was moving on from Fields, what would it take to get him?

Maybe trade for him and nab MHJ at 3? Lukewarm on the idea honestly, just spitballing.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
If Chicago was moving on from Fields, what would it take to get him?

Maybe trade for him and nab MHJ at 3? Lukewarm on the idea honestly, just spitballing.
It's been rumored they are looking at a 2nd or 3rd as the bulk of the value. I don't think it makes sense for NE to make a trade for Fields, but honestly if they did... trade down, I just don't get the MHJ obsession... he's a really good prospect at WR, but so are at least 2 other guys in this draft, the gap is quite small, and moving down from 3 with a QB needy team to 6, 7 or 8 puts you in position for one of the top 3 WRs or top tackles, and likely picks you up a draft pick than can get you another potential bluechipper.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,863
It's been rumored they are looking at a 2nd or 3rd as the bulk of the value. I don't think it makes sense for NE to make a trade for Fields, but honestly if they did... trade down, I just don't get the MHJ obsession... he's a really good prospect at WR, but so are at least 2 other guys in this draft, the gap is quite small, and moving down from 3 with a QB needy team to 6, 7 or 8 puts you in position for one of the top 3 WRs or top tackles, and likely picks you up a draft pick than can get you another potential bluechipper.
I could be sold on this. I like Nabers and Odunze about as much as MHJ. Say you trade a 3rd for Fields, you could then trade down from 3 to 6 with the Giants and pick up an extra 2nd and maybe a mid round pick.

Or maybe the Cardinals are willing to swap their 2nd and one of our mid round picks to move up a spot and take MHJ.

Then, you have added Fields as your QB, an elite WR prospect in Nabers/Odunze, and have 2 early seconds to fortify the OL. Splash some FA dollars on another WR and you’ve remade your offense quite a bit.

This is all contingent, of course, on having a positive scouting report on Fields, which I know many do not.
 

dcdrew10

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
1,406
Washington, DC via Worcester
There are always ifs when projecting NFL success on college players, but if the QB available at 3 is not the right fit or has major questions, maybe you do go with MHJ or Alt or you trade back and fill holes on the offense. It could be a recipe for mediocrity, butI could be convinced to go with that route. In reality it’s hard to argue against going QB. TBH, I’m happy it’s not BB making this choice.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,255
Does it help that apparently the Pats scouts wanted AJ Brown and were overruled?

If you miss on a WR your offense can survive with other WRs, RBs, TEs, etc. You miss on a QB and the whole thing goes out the window.

I won't be RAGING if we take MHJ, but I'm still leaning QB.
It’s an easy spin for the org to say “Pats scouts wanted Brown but Bill was sold on Harry.” With so many scouts involved in the process surely there were “Pats scouts” who preferred Brown without it necessarily being the majority and they would never be challenged bc BB would never go back and make a statement regarding this public spin.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,285
Tuukka's refugee camp
Honestly, do you really see Josh Fields as a SB winning QB?

I want some of what yall are smoking.
Correct. He had 2 good games last year against Commanders and the Broncos. In those he threw 8 TDs and 1 INT. The rest of the year he was 8 TDs and 8 INTs. He also missed 4 games, another trend that has continued.

He was basically average to quite bad in every other game. Maybe you bump one of those to above average based on his legs but that’s pressing it. The Bears surged on the strength of their defense. Fields played decent enough to not fuck it up.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
Correct. He had 2 good games last year against Commanders and the Broncos. He was average to quite bad in every other game. Maybe you bump one of those to above average based on his legs but that’s pressing it. The Bears surged on the strength of their defense. Fields played decent enough to not fuck it up.
I'm not that high on him, but he was good in the ATL and both DET games.

But yes, generally I agree, he's an elite runner if you ever built around that, but as a passer he's still very much a work in progress. Worth rolling the dice on for a team that has no other real path to a QB (not a Cousins destination, no top pick) but not a guy you pass on one of the top QBs in this draft for.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,816
Hartford, CT
Fields is a dynamic runner, but he flat out isn’t a good passer, and betting on a massive leap in his pre/post play processing and accuracy/anticipation after three years is a real stretch to me. I don’t see it, even putting aside the big price tag you’ll have to pay to keep him starting in 2025.
 

jtn46

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 10, 2004
9,853
Norwalk, CT
Fields is a dynamic runner, but he flat out isn’t a good passer, and betting on a massive leap in his pre/post play processing and accuracy/anticipation after three years is a real stretch to me. I don’t see it, even putting aside the big price tag you’ll have to pay to keep him starting in 2025.
He can make some remarkable throws, and I do wonder if he had better protection, which the Pats probably can't offer if he could really grow as a passer. I am persuaded by the salary requirements to avoid him and the Bears are probably looking at a mediocre return because of that unless there is some team out there that wants to give him $200 million, which maybe there is, but the entire league said "no thanks" to Lamar Jackson a year ago, and granted, Lamar would have cost more draft capital but he is also Justin Fields Super-Sayain form.

The Pats do have a ton of cap space so if they draft MHJ or a tackle I could see them picking up an expensive QB on a short commitment like Jimmy G which works if either they draft a 2nd round QB they want to hold clipboard or just punt the decision to April 2025, because there is probably a decent chance this team is picking in the top half of that draft too.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,584
I watched the team a ton (wolverine fan/alum so I’m also biased)…he’s had great lines and running games and an elite pass catching tight end in Loveland…but his receivers are nfl jags at best. Also, the offense is very much a pro offense - if he played at, say, Oklahoma or usc, he’d put up massive numbers. He can run and throw accurately on the run and he’s highly dedicated kid. I think he’d work his ass off, and his talent is real. He’s 20 and a far better player than penix or nix was at the same age.
Fair enough, and good info.
 

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
9,204
Fields is a dynamic runner, but he flat out isn’t a good passer, and betting on a massive leap in his pre/post play processing and accuracy/anticipation after three years is a real stretch to me. I don’t see it, even putting aside the big price tag you’ll have to pay to keep him starting in 2025.
Married to a Bears fan, I’ve seen just about every snap Fields has taken…and those he’s missed.

The running is elite. He really knows how to read and set up blocks, find gaps, etc. a better scheme might make better use of this, but it also opens Fields up to more hits.

The arm is plenty strong enough to make all the throws, but the accuracy is streaky at best. Even on short throws with good protection, Fields can be wild. I don’t know enough to say if this is a fixable mechanical issue or something else. Anyone trading for him will want to be very confident that they have a fix.

Fields has really poor pocket awareness. He has played behind some poor lines, but we can compare him directly to Bagent this season. This season Fields was sacked on 10.6% of his drop backs, Bagent 3.4%. And you can quickly observe why - Bagent is so well drilled in his approach that it’s intuitive for him: drop back, bounce, ball out or move in the pocket. Fields doesn’t have this ingrained clock. I have no idea if you can teach that to him now.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
Married to a Bears fan, I’ve seen just about every snap Fields has taken…and those he’s missed.

The running is elite. He really knows how to read and set up blocks, find gaps, etc. a better scheme might make better use of this, but it also opens Fields up to more hits.

The arm is plenty strong enough to make all the throws, but the accuracy is streaky at best. Even on short throws with good protection, Fields can be wild. I don’t know enough to say if this is a fixable mechanical issue or something else. Anyone trading for him will want to be very confident that they have a fix.

Fields has really poor pocket awareness. He has played behind some poor lines, but we can compare him directly to Bagent this season. This season Fields was sacked on 10.6% of his drop backs, Bagent 3.4%. And you can quickly observe why - Bagent is so well drilled in his approach that it’s intuitive for him: drop back, bounce, ball out or move in the pocket. Fields doesn’t have this ingrained clock. I have no idea if you can teach that to him now.
Yeah, someone (PFF maybe?) was talking about Fields and they had basically two stat sets for positive and negative.

The positive was that when targeting Moore and Kmet (the only real threats on that team) his numbers were much better than when targeting the flotsom.
The negative was his time to throw was something insane... like over 4.5 seconds insane.

Somebody might fix him into a good enough passer that the running makes him a huge asset, but it shouldn't be the Patriots. It should be someone like ATL/PIT/LV? who has no path to an elite prospect.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,662
Philadelphia
Interesting Twitter thread on drafting a QB in the first round. Hit rates are very high 1st overall.

The below part of the thread looks at just 2-10 and 2-5.

View: https://twitter.com/davekluge/status/1747397139834007958?s=46&t=2Ncci6pVLxm2q2YAXCD8zw


full thread unrolled

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1747397129138479457.html
The thing about this kind of analysis is that you need to also consider (a) the value of getting a top QB and (b) the chance of getting a top QB via some route other than drafting one in the first round.

Basically, a lot of people look at the idea of a first round QB hit rate of 25% (or whatever) and think that's a bad decision. But if the upside to hitting is super high (and it is) and the alternative is to make a 2nd-4th round selection with a hit rate of like 5%, then 25% starts to look pretty good.

The reality is that when you don't have a top QB in the NFL you're pretty fucked and need to get lucky to get unfucked. There's no magical solution for doing it other than taking the best gambles possible and hoping for the best.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
The thing about this kind of analysis is that you need to also consider (a) the value of getting a top QB and (b) the chance of getting a top QB via some route other than drafting one in the first round.

Basically, a lot of people look at the idea of a first round QB hit rate of 25% (or whatever) and think that's a bad decision. But if the upside to hitting is super high (and it is) and the alternative is to make a 2nd-4th round selection with a hit rate of like 5%, then 25% starts to look pretty good.

The reality is that when you don't have a top QB in the NFL you're pretty fucked and need to get lucky to get unfucked. There's no magical solution for doing it other than taking the best gambles possible and hoping for the best.
I think from the whole thread, it wasn't about 1st round vs. anything else, it was #1 pick vs. something else, ie... if you need a QB and you have the #1 pick you should always take the QB not trade back and take one later in the round.

But yeah, the analysis is flawed anyway, I noted the issue with the stat choices earlier, but also... #1 pick QB is a weird criteria to use instead of #1 QB in a draft. Amusingly, I think the latter would probably actually make the gaps bigger, since it gets guys in the 90s like McNabb, McNair, etc. who were the top QB but went lower in the top 10 because teams were not as good at figuring out QB value then.
 
Oct 12, 2023
801
I really don’t understand the fascination with Harrison over a QB. Even if you had a crystal ball and told me Harrison was going to be as good as projected and there was a 40% chance the QB hits his ceiling, im still taking the chance on the QB.

Harrison is undeniably one of the best WR prospects in the past 20 years, probably a top 3-4 WR prospect in the 35 years I’ve followed the draft closely but he’s still a WR. Even in today’s league where WR play is more important than ever, one elite WR doesn’t do much for you if your QB isn’t one of the top guys in the league.

Jamar Chase, Justin Jefferson, Tyreek Hill, Amari Cooper, CeeDee Lamb, Jaylen Waddle, Devonta Smith, AJ Brown, DJ Moore, all sitting at home right now because their QB’s either suck or are “decent but not elite” or (Dak) played like trash in the playoffs

Meanwhile the leader receivers (for WR) from this weekends winners are Rashee Rice, Romeo Doubs, Amon Ra St Brown, Nico Collins and Josh Reynolds. Mike Evans had under 50 yards for Tampa. St. Brown is a stud but wasn’t much of a prospect. The rest of those guys are solid but not elite players.

Does anyone actually think the Pats can consistently compete with Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, maybe Herbert (if they can find a coach), Stroud, Rodgers (maybe) with a Bo Nix caliber prospect (even if he hits his ceiling), Justin Fields or Jacoby Brissett? A semi competent D Coordinator will find a way to limit Harrison and force your mid tier QB to throw to other guys and mid tier QB almost always come up small in those situations.

Furthermore, the punt the decision to 2025 or beyond really doesn’t make sense. Even if you’re not sold on Maye/Daniels (whoever is #3) next year’s QB crop is looking thin and even if some of these guys take a step forward, you’re not likely -hopefully anyway - to be drafting top 3 again so you’re going to have to compete with other teams to move up and give up tons of capital to go get a guy like Ewers or Sanders who probably wouldn’t even be a top 5 QB in this class.

I understand that Daniels’ meteoric rise can be viewed with skepticism, and Maye didn’t have a great year. But even with those flaws, they’re great prospects compared to the average 2nd and 3rd QB’s typically available. A franchise QB is the most valuable thing you can have in all of professional sports. Any prospect can bust but QB is the one spot where if you hit a home run or even a triple you’ve catapulted your team into fairly consistent playoff contention. I really wonder if the Harrison fixation isn’t just a product of Pats fans being so starved for good WR play.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,423
I've been back and forth on this forever, but QB is the right answer I think, especially since there's three legit potential stud prospects out there and the Pats would be assured of getting one of them. Of course there's a real chance he doesn't pan out, but this is the time to take the home run swing. Right now. Hit it and the Pats are instantly back in business.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,584
I've been back and forth on this forever, but QB is the right answer I think, especially since there's three legit potential stud prospects out there and the Pats would be assured of getting one of them. Of course there's a real chance he doesn't pan out, but this is the time to take the home run swing. Right now. Hit it and the Pats are instantly back in business.
We will likely know their path when FA opens. They sign Cousins or Mayfield or something then they're probably taking MHJ or trading down. They get Pittman or something, then they're probably gonna take a QB.

(And yes, I know Mayfield and Pittman may be franchised or whatever, but the FA targets will give some clue)
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,995
Why would Tampa let Mayfield go and even if they did why would Mayfield want to be here? Same question with Kirk Cousins. I'd be shocked if they sign elsewhere. Maybe there's a chance Minnesota picks a QB in the 1st and decides to rebuild, but if that were to happen I don't see a 36 year old Cousins looking at New England as a favored destination over other QB-needy teams.
  • Atlanta: weak division, London/Bijan/Pitts, solid offensive line. Possibly Belichick as the HC.
  • Pittsburgh: playoff team, Mike Tomlin.
  • Las Vegas: Davante Adams.
The realistic non-draft QB options are like Brissett, Minshew, Tannehill, Jameis, and Garoppolo (assuming he gets cut). Unless they want to get into the Russell Wilson sweepstakes (please no).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,723
Why would Tampa let Mayfield go and even if they did why would Mayfield want to be here? Same question with Kirk Cousins. I'd be shocked if they sign elsewhere. Maybe there's a chance Minnesota picks a QB in the 1st and decides to rebuild, but if that were to happen I don't see a 36 year old Cousins looking at New England as a favored destination over other QB-needy teams.
  • Atlanta: weak division, London/Bijan/Pitts, solid offensive line. Possibly Belichick as the HC.
  • Pittsburgh: playoff team, Mike Tomlin.
  • Las Vegas: Davante Adams.
The realistic non-draft QB options are like Brissett, Minshew, Tannehill, Jameis, and Garoppolo (assuming he gets cut). Unless they want to get into the Russell Wilson sweepstakes (please no).
Yeah, my general feel is the only viable QB options not in the draft for NE are: Fields, one of the retreads above, Wilson or maybe Geno Smith if SEA's new staff re-sets. One of the reasons I don't see anything but a QB at 3 being likely.