Patriots 2023 Season

[Roy H.]

I agree with Moranis on this one. I don’t think you need to have the best receiver to be a top team. A QB, yes. But if not a QB, and you can get value by trading down, trade down and build depth. Second round receivers are fine.

You don't need anything. There are multiple ways to build a team.

MHJ is going #4 to AZ at the latest. If the Patriots like the player, they need to trade up to 2 or take him at 3. Now, you can say that you don't think he's worth it, or you don't like him. I'm commenting on Mo's take that anything else is dumb.

I think Moranis' take is logical, but that's because most of the recent scouting I've seen is lowering the gap between MHJ and Odunze/Nabers.  But, if a team feels MHJ is the next Megatron, I agree that it's a rational choice to take him.

But, if MHJ is Justin Jefferson and Odunze is A.J. Brown and Atlanta offers you an extra #1 and #2, I'd prefer the picks.

[green_bballers13]

I actually favor the Belichickian trade down for value, as this team has an entire offense to rebuild. So if you get a king's ransom for 3 and still get a top WR like Nabers or Odunze, that's a win.

I think people are starting to listen to the Mel Kipers of the world too much. If you need a quarterback, draft a quarterback early, even if they could be a bust. That makes no sense to me.

I much prefer Belichick's approach (and even Billy Beane's). Draft analysts pretend like they know the future, but they don't. Taking multiple shots on goal if there's no clear conviction is the way to go.

If you have a conviction, though, take the player.

[Vermont Green]

I agree with Moranis on this one. I don’t think you need to have the best receiver to be a top team. A QB, yes. But if not a QB, and you can get value by trading down, trade down and build depth. Second round receivers are fine.

You don't need anything. There are multiple ways to build a team.

MHJ is going #4 to AZ at the latest. If the Patriots like the player, they need to trade up to 2 or take him at 3. Now, you can say that you don't think he's worth it, or you don't like him. I'm commenting on Mo's take that anything else is dumb.

I think Moranis' take is logical, but that's because most of the recent scouting I've seen is lowering the gap between MHJ and Odunze/Nabers.  But, if a team feels MHJ is the next Megatron, I agree that it's a rational choice to take him.

But, if MHJ is Justin Jefferson and Odunze is A.J. Brown and Atlanta offers you an extra #1 and #2, I'd prefer the picks.

I am not sure that even if Harrison is going to be the best receiver in the game, what does that really get you?  How many teams make it to the super bowl because they have the best receiver?  The best QB?  Sure.  The best OL?  The best defense?  The only individual player that can make that difference is the QB.  Every other position group is about depth.  Any good coach can take 1 top receiver out of the game.  You need 3-4 solid receivers.  Of course if you have depth and a really good top receiver, that is the best of both worlds but it is not worth it to me to use a #3 pick on a receiver, no matter how good.  I would rather have 2 second round receivers for the depth.  If you don't have a good QB and a solid OL, you are not going to get the ball to the WR anyway, no matter how good he is.

[Moranis]

No issues with taking MHJ at #3.

Is it it making the most of the pick?  Probably not. But if they take a player at a position of need who, IMO, has the least bust potential in the draft, so be it.

so you agree that if it isn't making the most of the pick, then it is dumb

This isn't a mid 1st round or later pick. It is a top 3 pick. You have to maximize the value and impact there because teams don't end up with those very often.  I mean the reason Chicago has 1 this year was them maximizing their pick last year when they weren't sold on Young or Stroud. They now get Williams or another haul for Williams because of it. 

[Donoghus]

No issues with taking MHJ at #3.

Is it it making the most of the pick?  Probably not. But if they take a player at a position of need who, IMO, has the least bust potential in the draft, so be it.

so you agree that if it isn't making the most of the pick, then it is dumb

This isn't a mid 1st round or later pick. It is a top 3 pick. You have to maximize the value and impact there because teams don't end up with those very often.  I mean the reason Chicago has 1 this year was them maximizing their pick last year when they weren't sold on Young or Stroud. They now get Williams or another haul for Williams because of it.

Not really.  If they stand pat, draft MHJ and he turns into the player I expect him to be as a pro, it's not going to look dumb at all.   Who's to saying drafting MHJ there isn't making the most of the pick? 

Could they have used their leverage there and extorted a bunch of capital from a team looking to draft Daniels, possibly?  Is that greater value?  At the time, yes.  Long term, maybe not. 

[green_bballers13]

No issues with taking MHJ at #3.

Is it it making the most of the pick?  Probably not. But if they take a player at a position of need who, IMO, has the least bust potential in the draft, so be it.

so you agree that if it isn't making the most of the pick, then it is dumb

This isn't a mid 1st round or later pick. It is a top 3 pick. You have to maximize the value and impact there because teams don't end up with those very often.  I mean the reason Chicago has 1 this year was them maximizing their pick last year when they weren't sold on Young or Stroud. They now get Williams or another haul for Williams because of it.

Not really.  If they stand pat, draft MHJ and he turns into the player I expect him to be as a pro, it's not going to look dumb at all.   Who's to saying drafting MHJ there isn't making the most of the pick? 

Could they have used their leverage there and extorted a bunch of capital from a team looking to draft Daniels, possibly?  Is that greater value?  At the time, yes.  Long term, maybe not.

Moranis said that. He roots for the Baltimore Ravens, who have a 2 time MVP QB picked at #32. I wonder what that team would have looked like against the Chiefs with a top WR instead of Zay Flowers.

[Phantom255x]

It really comes down to if the Pats believe Daniels and Maye are "the guy". If not, then it'll be MHJ or more likely, a trade down. I do find it telling how much Mayo is putting a stock on "speedy, electric, athletic players". Jayden Daniels fits that perfectly but even Maye is athletic and has some underrated speed/escapability/scramble-ability.

I mean I'm really not telling anyone something they don't know, Mac and Zappe were both just painfully slow. Even with a lot of green grass it'd look like each guy was going in slow motion and even the bigger defenders could easily catch them. You don't necessarily need a Kyler Murray/Lamar/Josh Allen-type running QB either, but at least someone who has decent speed and can scramble around. Mahomes and Burrow can do that and do it well. So can the likes of Goff, Prescott, Stafford, etc. There aren't too many stationary guys anymore in the NFL, maybe Cousins? Not like the days with Brady, Rivers and Peyton Manning, but even after 2014 Brady definitely worked on and improved his own footwork and movements in the pocket which I think enhanced him during that 2014-2018 runs.

[Vermont Green]

Perception can be a funny thing.  Now I am sure I am not quoting official times but here is what is reported for 40 times for the top QBs:

Williams:   4.56 sec
Maye:       4.60 sec
Daniels:    4.50 sec

For reference, Josh Allen is reported at 4.76 sec.  Mahomes is reported at 4.80 sec.

I agree that running to gain yardage is not a top thing to rate QBs on.  Mobility in general though, moving in the pocket, avoiding sacks, extending plays, is very important.  But that is about reading the pocket as much as it is athletic ability.  Brady for example was very good at making little moves in the pocket, feeling pressure, stepping up, spinning out.

All 3 of these prospects appear to be plenty athletic enough for the NFL.  Their success is going to be more about decision making and staying cool when under pressure, the things you can't measure.  It is totally irrational but I am leaning Maye, but I recognize that I really have no idea which of these is going to turn out to be the best, there is no way that anyone knows.

[Roy H.]

It's a lazy comparison, but every time I think of Maye I see Mitch Trubisky.  I want nothing to do with him, mostly because the Bears screwed the pooch so much with Trubisky (while trading picks that turned into two Pro Bowlers to move up one spot.)

Interestingly enough, I saw this quote this morning with an NFL OC making the same comparison:

"I spoke to an offensive coordinator earlier this morning who told me that essentially one of the comps that his team is working up for Drake Maye is Mitch Trubisky, who obviously was also a North Carolina quarterback," NBC Sports Boston's Phil Perry said on Arbella Early Edition. "Good size, good arm, good athlete, but obviously didn't work out all that well for Trubisky when he was drafted near the top of the draft all those years ago."

Like I said, I think it's lazy, because a large part of the comparison is that they both went to UNC.  They play a similar style, but Maye has more of a track record.  Plus, it's going to come down to what Maye has between his ears, and how thick his skin is / how short his memory is.

[Vermont Green]

It's a lazy comparison, but every time I think of Maye I see Mitch Trubisky.  I want nothing to do with him, mostly because the Bears screwed the pooch so much with Trubisky (while trading picks that turned into two Pro Bowlers to move up one spot.)

Interestingly enough, I saw this quote this morning with an NFL OC making the same comparison:

"I spoke to an offensive coordinator earlier this morning who told me that essentially one of the comps that his team is working up for Drake Maye is Mitch Trubisky, who obviously was also a North Carolina quarterback," NBC Sports Boston's Phil Perry said on Arbella Early Edition. "Good size, good arm, good athlete, but obviously didn't work out all that well for Trubisky when he was drafted near the top of the draft all those years ago."

Like I said, I think it's lazy, because a large part of the comparison is that they both went to UNC.  They play a similar style, but Maye has more of a track record.  Plus, it's going to come down to what Maye has between his ears, and how thick his skin is / how short his memory is.

That could turn out to be an apt comparison, it could turn to be completely off.  What is it that has prevented Trubisky from being successful?  The "book" on him is that the issue is questionable decision-making and poor mechanics.  Mechanics are something a scout can assess.  I think Maye is deemed to have good mechanics.  But the decision making isn't measurable.  Even if a QB demonstrated sound decision making in college, any college, the NFL comes at you faster and harder.  Brock Purdy makes good fast decisions at NFL speed.  Many top college QBs can't.  Trubisky hasn't so far, likely never will.

[Vermont Green]

No issues with taking MHJ at #3.

Is it it making the most of the pick?  Probably not. But if they take a player at a position of need who, IMO, has the least bust potential in the draft, so be it.

so you agree that if it isn't making the most of the pick, then it is dumb

This isn't a mid 1st round or later pick. It is a top 3 pick. You have to maximize the value and impact there because teams don't end up with those very often.  I mean the reason Chicago has 1 this year was them maximizing their pick last year when they weren't sold on Young or Stroud. They now get Williams or another haul for Williams because of it.

Moranis, some of us are trying to agree with you preferring not to take Harrison with the #3 pick.  That is different than saying it would be dumb to take Harrison.  Harrison is a solid, safe pick.  Taking a QB is a risk.  Passing on a QB is a risk.  I see the differing opinions as more about risk than anything.

My point of view, which is often the minority view, is that a single player at the WR position does not impact the game enough to warrant using a top pick.  I see a better path to success to get a QB, but if you can't do that, go for depth.  Depth at WR, depth at OL, depth on Defense.  If you can trade #3 for say a first round tackle, a second round WR, and a couple more top 50 picks next year, you are better off.  The only exception is QB, that is the only position where an individual player can make that much impact.

It is a unique position for the Pats.  Because there will be a big name QB prospect available at #3, some team may be willing to overpay for that pick.  If we trade the pick and Maye or Daniels turns out to be a star or even a solid starter, those tackles and second round WRs we get will not look so great in comparison.  But if the QB turns out to be a bust, it will be the Pats fleeced the other team.  I don't think any team would trade up in a big way to take a WR.  ARI may be happy to get Harrison at #4, still a high pick for a WR in my view, but I don't expect them to trade up for him.  Nor do I expect any other team will offer them a bunch to move up to #4 to take him.

Now if a QB falls to #4, there will be plenty of interest.

[Goldstar88]

No issues with taking MHJ at #3.

Is it it making the most of the pick?  Probably not. But if they take a player at a position of need who, IMO, has the least bust potential in the draft, so be it.

so you agree that if it isn't making the most of the pick, then it is dumb

This isn't a mid 1st round or later pick. It is a top 3 pick. You have to maximize the value and impact there because teams don't end up with those very often.  I mean the reason Chicago has 1 this year was them maximizing their pick last year when they weren't sold on Young or Stroud. They now get Williams or another haul for Williams because of it.

Moranis, some of us are trying to agree with you preferring not to take Harrison with the #3 pick.  That is different than saying it would be dumb to take Harrison.  Harrison is a solid, safe pick.  Taking a QB is a risk.  Passing on a QB is a risk.  I see the differing opinions as more about risk than anything.

My point of view, which is often the minority view, is that a single player at the WR position does not impact the game enough to warrant using a top pick.  I see a better path to success to get a QB, but if you can't do that, go for depth.  Depth at WR, depth at OL, depth on Defense.  If you can trade #3 for say a first round tackle, a second round WR, and a couple more top 50 picks next year, you are better off.  The only exception is QB, that is the only position where an individual player can make that much impact.

It is a unique position for the Pats.  Because there will be a big name QB prospect available at #3, some team may be willing to overpay for that pick.  If we trade the pick and Maye or Daniels turns out to be a star or even a solid starter, those tackles and second round WRs we get will not look so great in comparison.  But if the QB turns out to be a bust, it will be the Pats fleeced the other team.  I don't think any team would trade up in a big way to take a WR.  ARI may be happy to get Harrison at #4, still a high pick for a WR in my view, but I don't expect them to trade up for him.  Nor do I expect any other team will offer them a bunch to move up to #4 to take him.

Now if a QB falls to #4, there will be plenty of interest.

Do the Chiefs make it to the SB without Kelce or the Niners without CMC? I doubt it. You need elite skill position players to win in the NFL today. Shanahan has made it to the SB with Jimmy G and Purdy. McVay made it to the SB with Goff and won with Stafford. Good, not great QB’s, but they all had elite weapons.

[Moranis]

I agree with Moranis on this one. I don’t think you need to have the best receiver to be a top team. A QB, yes. But if not a QB, and you can get value by trading down, trade down and build depth. Second round receivers are fine.

You don't need anything. There are multiple ways to build a team.

MHJ is going #4 to AZ at the latest. If the Patriots like the player, they need to trade up to 2 or take him at 3. Now, you can say that you don't think he's worth it, or you don't like him. I'm commenting on Mo's take that anything else is dumb.

I think Moranis' take is logical, but that's because most of the recent scouting I've seen is lowering the gap between MHJ and Odunze/Nabers.  But, if a team feels MHJ is the next Megatron, I agree that it's a rational choice to take him.

But, if MHJ is Justin Jefferson and Odunze is A.J. Brown and Atlanta offers you an extra #1 and #2, I'd prefer the picks.

How much did Detroit win with Megatron?

[Moranis]

No issues with taking MHJ at #3.

Is it it making the most of the pick?  Probably not. But if they take a player at a position of need who, IMO, has the least bust potential in the draft, so be it.

so you agree that if it isn't making the most of the pick, then it is dumb

This isn't a mid 1st round or later pick. It is a top 3 pick. You have to maximize the value and impact there because teams don't end up with those very often.  I mean the reason Chicago has 1 this year was them maximizing their pick last year when they weren't sold on Young or Stroud. They now get Williams or another haul for Williams because of it.

Moranis, some of us are trying to agree with you preferring not to take Harrison with the #3 pick.  That is different than saying it would be dumb to take Harrison.  Harrison is a solid, safe pick.  Taking a QB is a risk.  Passing on a QB is a risk.  I see the differing opinions as more about risk than anything.

My point of view, which is often the minority view, is that a single player at the WR position does not impact the game enough to warrant using a top pick.  I see a better path to success to get a QB, but if you can't do that, go for depth.  Depth at WR, depth at OL, depth on Defense.  If you can trade #3 for say a first round tackle, a second round WR, and a couple more top 50 picks next year, you are better off.  The only exception is QB, that is the only position where an individual player can make that much impact.

It is a unique position for the Pats.  Because there will be a big name QB prospect available at #3, some team may be willing to overpay for that pick.  If we trade the pick and Maye or Daniels turns out to be a star or even a solid starter, those tackles and second round WRs we get will not look so great in comparison.  But if the QB turns out to be a bust, it will be the Pats fleeced the other team.  I don't think any team would trade up in a big way to take a WR.  ARI may be happy to get Harrison at #4, still a high pick for a WR in my view, but I don't expect them to trade up for him.  Nor do I expect any other team will offer them a bunch to move up to #4 to take him.

Now if a QB falls to #4, there will be plenty of interest.

Do the Chiefs make it to the SB without Kelce or the Niners without CMC? I doubt it. You need elite skill position players to win in the NFL today. Shanahan has made it to the SB with Jimmy G and Purdy. McVay made it to the SB with Goff and won with Stafford. Good, not great QB’s, but they all had elite weapons.

the Chiefs literally had a top 5 WR and traded him for draft picks and then promptly won back to back Superbowls without the top 5 WR.  While the team that acquired said WR hasn't won a playoff game.

While CMC wasn't winning anything in Carolina, the Niners were in a Superbowl with Jimmy G at QB.

[Vermont Green]

No issues with taking MHJ at #3.

Is it it making the most of the pick?  Probably not. But if they take a player at a position of need who, IMO, has the least bust potential in the draft, so be it.

so you agree that if it isn't making the most of the pick, then it is dumb

This isn't a mid 1st round or later pick. It is a top 3 pick. You have to maximize the value and impact there because teams don't end up with those very often.  I mean the reason Chicago has 1 this year was them maximizing their pick last year when they weren't sold on Young or Stroud. They now get Williams or another haul for Williams because of it.

Moranis, some of us are trying to agree with you preferring not to take Harrison with the #3 pick.  That is different than saying it would be dumb to take Harrison.  Harrison is a solid, safe pick.  Taking a QB is a risk.  Passing on a QB is a risk.  I see the differing opinions as more about risk than anything.

My point of view, which is often the minority view, is that a single player at the WR position does not impact the game enough to warrant using a top pick.  I see a better path to success to get a QB, but if you can't do that, go for depth.  Depth at WR, depth at OL, depth on Defense.  If you can trade #3 for say a first round tackle, a second round WR, and a couple more top 50 picks next year, you are better off.  The only exception is QB, that is the only position where an individual player can make that much impact.

It is a unique position for the Pats.  Because there will be a big name QB prospect available at #3, some team may be willing to overpay for that pick.  If we trade the pick and Maye or Daniels turns out to be a star or even a solid starter, those tackles and second round WRs we get will not look so great in comparison.  But if the QB turns out to be a bust, it will be the Pats fleeced the other team.  I don't think any team would trade up in a big way to take a WR.  ARI may be happy to get Harrison at #4, still a high pick for a WR in my view, but I don't expect them to trade up for him.  Nor do I expect any other team will offer them a bunch to move up to #4 to take him.

Now if a QB falls to #4, there will be plenty of interest.

Do the Chiefs make it to the SB without Kelce or the Niners without CMC? I doubt it. You need elite skill position players to win in the NFL today. Shanahan has made it to the SB with Jimmy G and Purdy. McVay made it to the SB with Goff and won with Stafford. Good, not great QB’s, but they all had elite weapons.

the Chiefs literally had a top 5 WR and traded him for draft picks and then promptly won back to back Superbowls without the top 5 WR.  While the team that acquired said WR hasn't won a playoff game.

While CMC wasn't winning anything in Carolina, the Niners were in a Superbowl with Jimmy G at QB.

I was going to say the same thing. They traded Hill and invested the cap space and draft picks into the offensive line and other aspects of the team infrastructure. And kept right on winning. If anything, this is the example that proves my point more than anything else.